Topline<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court allowed the U.S. Postal Service on Monday to move forward with a new rule that would only allow the agency to send mail-in ballots to voters whose information has been shared with the federal government\u2014but the rule is still in flux ahead of the November midterms amid a second court challenge, and justices didn\u2019t rule on whether the rule is actually legal.<\/p>\n
Election workers prepare mail-in ballots for tallying at the Los Angeles County Ballot Processing Center on November 4, 2024, in City of Industry, California.<\/p>\n
AFP via Getty ImagesKey Facts<\/p>\n
The Postal Service finalized a new rule<\/a> on Friday based on President Donald Trump\u2019s March executive order<\/a> targeting mail-in voting, which requires the USPS to only mail ballots when states comply with new federal reporting requirements.<\/p>\n The Supreme Court ruled<\/a> 6-3 Monday to pause a court order that blocked the rule from taking effect, however, siding with the Trump administration\u2019s argument that the legal challenge against the rule was brought too early.<\/p>\n The rule<\/a> requires state and local election officials to submit voters\u2019 names and addresses to USPS through a new portal, and only voters whose information is submitted will be allowed to receive mail-in ballots, which will be sent in envelopes with special federal barcodes.<\/p>\n The rule doesn\u2019t require voters to take any additional actions, but voting rights advocates have opposed the policy and sued over it in court, alleging it could disenfranchise voters by adding additional steps and administrative hurdles for them to vote by mail.<\/p>\n USPS\u2019s rule hadn\u2019t yet taken effect because lower courts have blocked it, and the agency said in its final rule that it would only take effect for the November midterms if the courts allow it.<\/p>\n While the Supreme Court has now weighed in on the case, the rule is still not yet in effect, because a separate lower court ruling also blocked the new policy and has not yet been lifted.<\/p>\n What to Watch for<\/p>\n The Supreme Court did not rule Monday on whether the new USPS rule is actually legal, and the litigation over its legality will move forward in lower court regardless of whether or not the rule is allowed to take effect for the midterms in the meantime. The Trump administration has asked the judge overseeing the other case against the USPS rule to either lift her previous order blocking the rule, or at least pause it while the government appeals it. It has asked the judge to rule by 5:30 p.m. EDT on Tuesday. Judge Indira Talwani previously blocked the order from taking effect in August, and after USPS finalized the rule on Friday anyway, the voting rights advocates who brought the lawsuit asked her to issue an \u201cemergency\u201d ruling that enforces her previous order and suggests the Trump administration violated it by finalizing the rule. Talwani has not yet ruled on that request, but criticized USPS finalizing the rule in an order Sunday, arguing the government published the final regulations while \u201cignoring the confusion that the publication will engender.\u201d The judge also criticized the Trump administration for publishing the final rule \u201con a Friday evening after the courts were closed.\u201d<\/p>\n Chief Critic<\/p>\n The Supreme Court\u2019s three liberal justices\u2014Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson\u2014dissented against their colleagues\u2019 decision Monday to let the USPS rule take effect. Sotomayor argued she didn\u2019t think it was too early to bring the legal challenge, penning a dissent that Kagan also signed on to, while Jackson argued the court\u2019s ruling \u201cneedlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections\u201d by allowing the rule now before deciding if it\u2019s actually legal. \u201cStates administering elections and the voting public that relies on them to do so deserve clarity, not caginess or confusion,\u201d Jackson wrote, criticizing the majority\u2019s \u201clack of situational awareness\u201d by allowing the rule so close to the midterms. \u201cTaking its eye off the ball, the majority misses the Government\u2019s actual objective: to secure our [approval] for its effort to foment chaos ahead of the November elections.\u201d<\/p>\n What Does The New Rule Say?<\/p>\n The rule<\/a> requires states to submit lists of their voters requesting mail-in ballots to USPS ahead of an election, and imposes new policies to ensure only those voters whose information has been sent to USPS can receive ballots through the mail. It also mandates the creation of new envelope designs and barcodes, which will make clear that ballots have been cleared through the federal system. It does not have any impact on which voters are eligible to vote by mail, which will still be determined by states. The USPS has said it will only process the information it receives from election officials, and will not take any steps itself to verify whether the voters submitted are eligible to vote. The rule requires election officials to provide the federal government with a voter\u2019s name, address, state and the barcodes that will be associated with their ballot. That information will be retained by the federal government, which will eventually send a list to state election officials of every single voter name and address USPS received in that state. If postal workers find any ballots that haven\u2019t complied with the federal requirements, they will be mailed back to election officials and will not be delivered.<\/p>\n What Do Voters Have To Know?<\/p>\n Voters will not have to do anything differently if the new USPS rule takes effect: ballots will still be requested and sent out by state and local election officials as they have been in the past, and the final rule specifies that states will still govern which voters in the state are eligible to vote by mail. The new system of registering voter information with USPS has the potential to cause administrative issues and delays, however, so voters should be aware of the rule if it takes effect. (USPS has argued<\/a> the rule \u201cdoes not\u2014nor is it intended to\u2014facilitate any form of voter suppression, affect election outcomes, or target particular demographics, districts, or states.\u201d)<\/p>\n Register for mail ballots early: The USPS rule requires election officials to submit voters\u2019 information to the federal government\u2019s new portal by at least 30 days before Election Day, or by the date that mail-in ballots start to be sent out. That doesn\u2019t mean all voters\u2019 information has to be supplied by that date, however, as election officials can keep submitting voters to the federal system until the last day mail-in ballots can be sent out. Given that it\u2019s unclear how long processing information through the new system could take, however, voters may want to request a mail ballot early to make sure there\u2019s enough time to have their information cleared.<\/p>\n Some groups are more at risk: In court filings opposing<\/a> the USPS rule, voting rights advocates have argued groups that are particularly reliant on mail-in ballots, like senior citizens and the disabled, could be at enhanced risk of disenfranchisement under the new system, given the potential for administrative issues. USPS and the Trump administration have said<\/a> postal officials will not take any steps to verify voters\u2019 eligibility, but some voting rights advocates have also expressed fears that people who may not be properly registered in government databases as being citizens\u2014such as people who were only recently granted citizenship\u2014could also face issues. In a filing to the Supreme Court, election officials also cautioned<\/a> the new processes around creating barcodes could be particularly difficult in rural communities with fewer resources.<\/p>\n Exemptions: The ballot reporting requirements do not apply to U.S. military and overseas voters who mail in ballots from outside the U.S., and also only apply to general elections, not primary elections.<\/p>\n What We Don\u2019t Know<\/p>\n If any states will decline to participate in the new system, should it take effect. While no states or localities have yet suggested they\u2019ll do so, that would mean voters in those areas would not be able to submit any ballots through the USPS, and would instead have to rely on other voting methods, like in-person voting and ballot drop boxes.<\/p>\n Key Background<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s executive order directing the USPS to restrict mailing ballots comes as the president has long attacked mail-in voting, falsely<\/a> claiming it\u2019s more susceptible to fraud\u2014despite regularly voting by mail himself<\/a>. The controversy over the USPS rule also comes after the Postal Service became a source of controversy in the 2020 election, as former Postmaster General Louis DeJoy implemented widely criticized changes<\/a> that resulted in mail delays. That sparked accusations that DeJoy, a Trump ally, was intentionally trying to stymie mail-in voting, which he and the USPS strongly denied. DeJoy\u2019s changes were eventually reversed<\/a> in response to court challenges, and USPS took additional<\/a> \u201cextraordinary measures\u201d ahead of the election to ensure ballots would arrive on time. DeJoy has since been replaced as postmaster general by David Steiner, a former FedEx board member who was reportedly<\/a> installed at Trump\u2019s urging. Steiner has said<\/a> he will follow Trump\u2019s directives on mail-in voting, but would defer to the courts regarding legal challenges.<\/p>\n Further Reading<\/p>\n Late Mail-In Ballots Can Be Counted After Election Day, Supreme Court Rules<\/a> (Forbes)<\/p>\n