Supreme Court Denies Trump's Effort to Curb Mail-In Voting Before Midterms

Today, the United States Supreme Court rejected a request by the Trump Administration to stay an injunction issued by the District Court in the mail-in voter case, United States Postal Service, et al. v. California, et al.

The Trump Administration had ordered states to issue lists of eligible voters to the US Postal Service. The US Postal Service would then mail ballots only to those voters on the list. It further required the use of tracking barcodes on ballot envelopes, and prioritized federal prosecution of state election officials who violated the order.

The executive order was part of a broader effort by the Trump Administration to combat what it has framed as widespread voter fraud by non-citizens.

The main Supreme Court order noted that the administration's attempt to overturn the District Court stay was "unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge," but gave little other explanation.

"Applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections," Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a concurring opinion.

Critics of the Trump Administration's order point out that the United States Constitution gives power over election procedures to the states and to Congress, not to the executive branch.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.

Alito claimed that the plaintiffs in the case "likely lack standing" and that the US Postal Service has "broad authority to regulate the mail."

In referencing the plaintiff's case, Alito wrote: "That Hail Mary pass is unlikely to be successfully completed here."

Several federal courts had already struck down the Trump Administration's order prior to Monday's ruling.

Image: Mark Thomas