Image source, Getty ImagesByLisa Lambert, Washington, Kwasi Gyamfi Asiedu and Kayla Epstein
- Published15 September 2026, 00:55 BST
Updated 4 minutes ago
The US Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump’s plan to restrict voting by mail before November’s midterm elections, in a setback for the White House.
The justices upheld a federal judge’s order that temporarily blocked the US Postal Service (USPS) from moving forwards with new requirements for postal ballots.
One legal group said in response that the decision would prevent the USPS from “sowing chaos in our elections”.
But it is unlikely to be the final word on the matter. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative, agreed with the ruling, but indicated he might later rule in Trump’s favour as litigation in the case continues.
The White House has not commented on the court’s decision.
Trump, who argued the rules would combat electoral fraud, signed an executive order in March that directed the USPS to deliver ballots only to voters on lists of citizens.
Legal challenges argued that the move violated states’ constitutional rights to run elections.
Election officials from 24 Democratic-led states and the District of Colombia also warned that the proposed changes were not ready for implementation and could prevent ballots from reaching voters.
Meanwhile some Republican-led states, including Florida, Louisiana, and Montana, supported the president in court filings.
Justice Kavanaugh wrote in the opinion that there was “at least a fair prospect that the final rule falls within the Postal Service’s statutory authority”. But he argued that “applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious”.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, also conservatives, dissented. They wrote that the challenge to Trump’s order was a “Hail Mary pass” that was unlikely to be successful ultimately.
“The Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail,” they added.
-
Trump signs executive order attempting to change mail-in voting
- Published2 April
-
Supreme Court allows late-arriving mail-in ballots in defeat for Trump
- Published29 June
About 30% of voters, mostly Democrats, cast postal ballots in the general election two years ago. However, several states like Oregon, Washington, and Colorado rely heavily or entirely on mail ballots for their elections, requiring Republicans to use the system as well.
Seven Republican state election officials warned the justices, external that allowing significant changes to mail ballot rules so close to the midterm elections would “lead to mistakes, delays, and confusion”.
Local election officials told the BBC this week they were proceeding as normal but had begun drafting contingency plans in case the court upended existing mail ballot procedures.
The rule changes would have resulted in “thousands of people disenfranchised” in Cherokee County, Georgia, its election director Anne Dover told the BBC. The heavily Republican county voted 69% for Trump in the 2024 election, in which about 10,000 of its residents voted by mail, according to Dover.
Monday’s decision earned praise from legal groups who have challenged other aspects of the Trump agenda.
“Today’s Supreme Court decision prevents the US Postal Service from sowing chaos in our elections,” Trevor Potter, president of Campaign Legal Center, said in a statement.
Since returning to the White House, Trump has sought to restrict voting by mail. While he himself has voted by post, he has long claimed this method allows non-citizens to cast ballots and is prone to fraud.
In March’s executive order, the president directed USPS to introduce unique barcodes on postal ballot envelopes.
State and local election officials would also be required to supply information to an online portal about voters who receive mail ballots.
Twenty-three states and Washington DC sued to stop Trump’s order.
The postal workers’ union also said clerks could not be trained in time for the election.
In court filings, the Trump administration maintained 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 imposed an injunction on 4 September blocking Trump’s order. She ruled that implementing the measures close to November’s elections could disenfranchise voters.
Last week, a US appeals court refused to put Judge Talwani’s order on hold.
On Sunday, another federal judge, Judge Carl Nichols, ruled against Trump’s order.
Some states have already begun distributing mail-in ballots ahead of the midterm elections, which will decide which party controls Congress.
It is not the first setback on postal ballots for Trump before the Supreme Court.
In June, the justices ruled that states may count ballots postmarked by election day, rejecting the Trump administration’s push to block votes being tallied when they are received after polls close.
Trump has previously made false claims that he lost the 2020 election owing to widespread electoral fraud.
Follow the twists and turns of Trump’s second term with North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher’s weekly US Politics Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.