Supreme Court blocks Trump's plan to restrict mail-in ballots

Supreme Court halts Trump effort to curb mail-in ballots

The US Supreme Court has turned down President Donald Trump’s attempt to limit voting by mail ahead of November’s midterm elections, dealing a blow to the White House.

The justices left in place a federal judge’s order that had temporarily stopped the US Postal Service (USPS) from proceeding with new rules for postal ballots.

Still, the ruling is probably not the last word. Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the decision, but signaled he could later side with Trump as the case continues through the courts.

Trump, who said the changes were needed to fight election fraud, issued an executive order in March telling the USPS to deliver ballots only to voters listed as citizens.

Opponents argued that the move infringed states’ constitutional authority to administer elections.

In the opinion, Justice Kavanaugh wrote that there was “at least a fair prospect that the final rule falls within the Postal Service's statutory authority”. However, he said that “applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious”.

Conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. They described the challenge to Trump’s order as a “Hail Mary pass” that was unlikely to succeed in the end.

“The Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail,” they added.

The White House did not immediately respond to the ruling.

Roughly 30% of voters, mainly Democrats, used postal ballots in the general election two years ago.

Since returning to the White House, Trump has tried to tighten rules on voting by mail. Although he has voted by post himself, he has long alleged that the method enables non-citizens to vote and is vulnerable to fraud.

Under the March executive order, the president instructed USPS to add unique barcodes to postal ballot envelopes.

State and local election officials would also have to provide information to an online portal about voters who receive mail ballots.

Twenty-three states and Washington DC filed suit to block Trump’s order.

The postal workers’ union also said clerks could not be trained in time for the election.

In court papers, the Trump administration argued that the new USPS rules were constitutional.

It said states “cannot choose to use the federal mails to carry out their elections but then insist that their election-related mail is somehow exempt from the Postal Service's rule-making authority, conferred by Congress”.

Boston-based Judge Indira Talwani issued an injunction on 4 September blocking Trump’s order. She said putting the measures into effect so close to November’s elections could disenfranchise voters.

Last week, a US appeals court declined to suspend Judge Talwani’s order.

On Sunday, another federal judge, Judge Carl Nichols, also ruled against Trump’s order.

Some states have already started sending out mail-in ballots before the midterm elections, which will determine which party controls Congress.

This is not Trump’s first setback at the Supreme Court over postal ballots.

In June, the justices ruled that states may count ballots postmarked by election day, rejecting the Trump administration’s effort to stop votes from being tallied if they arrive after polls close.

Trump has previously made false claims that he lost the 2020 election because of widespread electoral fraud.