Judge blocks USPS mail-in ballot restrictions

A federal judge in Washington blocked the US Postal Service from moving ahead with proposed mail-in ballot restrictions tied to President Donald Trump’s election executive order, siding with the NAACP in a case that challenged new requirements for states and voters.

US District Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled Wednesday that the Postal Service plan should not proceed, finding that it would likely violate a 2021 settlement requiring the agency to take “extraordinary measures” to ensure timely delivery of election mail. The ruling bars USPS from enforcing the proposal while granting the NAACP’s motion to enforce compliance with that settlement.

“NAACP has plausibly suggested — and the Postal Service has not disputed — that the Proposed Rule is already having a ‘real impact on present day affairs’,” Sullivan wrote, according to Al Jazeera.

The proposed Postal Service rule followed Trump’s March executive order, titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections,” which called for sweeping changes to election administration. The order directed the Department of Justice to act against states that “fail to comply” with certain standards for mail-in ballots and accused states that accept absentee or mail-in ballots after Election Day of violating the law.

Under the USPS proposal, states would have to give federal agencies access to voter information and adopt new mail ballot procedures before the Postal Service would deliver ballots. The Guardian reported that the June 2 proposal would require states to provide voter rolls to the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. Al Jazeera reported that the rule was put forward in May and would require states to provide lists of absentee and mail-in voters, with ballots that do not conform to the list returned.

The proposal also would require a new envelope design for mail-in ballots, including rules on logos and barcode placement. If states failed to comply, USPS would refuse to deliver the ballots.

The NAACP argued that the plan violated a 2021 legal settlement reached after the civil rights group sued the Postal Service in 2020, when delayed mail service threatened election access during the Covid-19 pandemic. That settlement requires USPS to prioritize monitoring and timely delivery of election mail and binds the agency until 2028, according to The Guardian.

Sullivan, who was appointed to the bench by former President Bill Clinton, agreed with the NAACP. His decision is the second recent court setback for Trump’s effort to restrict mail-in voting. Last week, US District Judge Indira Talwani blocked the administration’s plan across 23 states and the District of Columbia in a separate challenge brought by the NAACP and states suing to stop the proposed rule. The Guardian reported that Sullivan’s order appears to extend that injunction nationwide because it enforces an agreement binding USPS as an agency.

The decision comes less than five months before the November 3 midterm elections, which will determine whether Trump’s Republican Party keeps control of both chambers of Congress. Al Jazeera reported that Trump has expressed fears he could face a third impeachment if Democrats win the legislature, and that he has spread unfounded theories that US elections are vulnerable to “vote rigging,” citing mail-in voting and electronic voting machines.

Civil rights advocates praised Sullivan’s ruling.

“This ruling is a critical step in protecting the rights of voters who rely on the timely delivery of mail-in ballots to participate in our democracy,” said Anthony Ashton, senior associate general counsel at the NAACP. “The proposed USPS changes would have created unnecessary and unlawful barriers, in direct violation of the USPS’s mandate to prioritize election mail.”

Ashton said the barriers “could have disproportionately harmed Black voters, who are more likely to rely on mail voting due to longstanding inequities in access.”

Allison Zieve, director of Public Citizen Litigation Group, said the court “correctly recognized that USPS’s plan to create roadblocks to mail-in voting was inconsistent with its commitment to timely deliver election mail.” She added: “USPS’s plan was unwise, unlawful, and a threat to the millions of voters who rely on mailed ballots to participate in our democracy.”

Sam Spital, associate director-counsel of the Legal Defense Fund, called the Postal Service plan “a blatant attempt” to disenfranchise voters who rely on mailed ballots. “Today’s decision recognizes that USPS cannot disregard its legal obligation to timely deliver mail-in ballots to all voters,” he said.

The Guardian reported that USPS was approached for comment.