The United States Supreme Court declined to allow President Donald Trump’s attempt to impose new restrictions on mail-in voting ahead of the November 2026 midterm elections, upholding a lower court’s injunction blocking the administration’s initiative. The ruling, issued on Monday, prevents the US Postal Service from enforcing requirements aimed at curtailing voting by mail, a major method used by approximately one-third of the electorate.
The court's majority concluded that the government was unlikely to prevail in its attempt to overturn the preliminary injunction, and that the circumstances did not justify an emergency stay of the lower court’s decision. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing the Postal Service has broad authority to regulate mail and potentially enforce the new rules. Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred with the majority in blocking the order for the current election cycle but suggested the administration might have a stronger case for similar changes by the 2028 presidential race. Kavanaugh emphasized that election officials did not have sufficient time to implement the new requirements before the midterms, noting the changes would have been “arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The executive order, issued by Trump in March, sought to establish a federal list of eligible voters and required states to adopt uniform envelope designs for mail ballots, with the Postal Service empowered to reject ballots from noncompliant states. This plan encountered swift opposition from 23 states, voting rights organizations, and certain state officials, who argued that the order was unprecedented, burdensome, and unlawful. They contended that the new demands could prevent millions of voters from casting ballots by mail, particularly in states that rely heavily on this voting method, and would place impossible logistical demands on election officials in a limited timeframe.
Legal challenges against the order highlighted concerns about the executive branch’s constitutional authority to impose such sweeping changes to election processes so close to an election, and cited issues including a faulty online portal needed to process voter eligibility lists. A whistleblower report detailed risks of ballot batches being discarded due to barcode errors in the portal, elevating fears of widespread disruption.
Trump has repeatedly criticised mail-in voting, linking it to unsubstantiated claims of fraud during the 2020 presidential election, despite evidence showing mail voting fraud is exceedingly rare. Independent studies have found fraudulent cases occur at minimal rates, with one analysis reporting only four cases per 10 million mail ballots cast.
The Supreme Court ruling preserves existing mail-in voting procedures for this year’s midterms, a development seen as a setback for the Trump administration’s broader election overhaul efforts, but leaves the door open for potential future legal challenges on the matter. Election officials in several states, including Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, had already begun distributing mail ballots under established protocols even as legal disputes continued.