Supreme Court lets Trump mail voting order advance

The Supreme Court on Monday allowed the Trump administration to move ahead, at least for now, with key parts of an executive order aimed at restricting mail voting ahead of the midterm elections, pausing a lower court ruling that had blocked the effort in 23 states and Washington, D.C.

The justices split 6-3 in granting emergency relief sought by the administration in a case brought by Democratic-led states. The court also granted a similar request from Alabama and 11 other Republican-led states. The order lifts a June injunction from U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston that had stopped federal agencies from implementing major portions of President Donald Trump’s directive in the states that sued.

At issue are provisions directing the Department of Homeland Security to develop state-by-state lists of residents eligible to vote and requiring the U.S. Postal Service to obtain lists of eligible mail voters from states. Trump’s order also calls for the Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to voters on those lists and for election officials to include certain barcodes on mail ballot envelopes.

The Supreme Court did not decide whether the executive order is legal. In an unsigned decision, the court said Talwani acted too soon by blocking implementation before agencies had finalized their plans.

“The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful,” the court said. “On that score, time will tell. But the Order itself does not harm the States, so the District Court lacked jurisdiction to bar the Government from trying to implement it.”

The ruling leaves room for states and voting-rights groups to challenge specific policies once they are finalized and put into effect. The Postal Service issued a final rule for federal ballot mail on Aug. 21 in response to the order, though the Trump administration told the court the rule does not go as far as the executive order had contemplated. According to the administration, the Postal Service “will not refuse to transmit ballots” even if senders are not included on a state list of registered voters.

The practical effect of Monday’s ruling remains uncertain. NPR reported that, in a separate but related lawsuit brought by voting-rights groups, Talwani issued a nationwide order on Aug. 11 blocking the Postal Service from following the president’s directives on mail ballot procedures. NBC News reported that the Supreme Court’s decision is likely to apply to that ruling as well, potentially allowing the administration to implement the order in the short term.

Talwani’s June ruling had found that Trump exceeded presidential authority under the Constitution, which assigns power over federal election rules to state legislatures and Congress. She also found that the Postal Service, which is independent of the president’s administration, lacks legal authority to control mail-in voting.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, joined by the court’s two other liberal justices. “Today’s decision does not address whether the President’s attempts to interfere with states’ administration of the November 2026 elections are lawful,” she wrote. “Nor does it suggest that the Executive Branch has any constitutional or statutory authority to implement the President’s directives. Instead, today’s decision merely postpones adjudication of those challenges.”

Trump has repeatedly criticized widespread mail voting and has claimed, without evidence, that the election system is plagued by fraud. His efforts to get Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, which would impose nationwide voting restrictions including proof of citizenship to register and voter ID, have not succeeded.

Legal and logistical hurdles remain. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the court that it was premature for judges to intervene because the Postal Service and other agencies had not yet determined how they would implement the order. In a July filing cited by NPR, Sauer also said implementation efforts would need to begin “as soon as early to mid-August” to affect the 2026 election, particularly because absentee and mail voting begin in some states weeks before Election Day.