Federal Appeals Court Temporarily Halts Mail-In Ballot Restrictions in Trump Administration USPS Ballot Changes Case

A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals handed the Trump administration a temporary victory on Friday, pausing a lower court injunction that blocked the U.S. Postal Service from advancing its proposed rule on mail-in ballots. The unanimous ruling allows the Postal Service to continue developing standards that would require states to provide voter lists and barcode information tied to ballots. However, a separate injunction issued by a federal judge in Massachusetts remains in effect, meaning the rule cannot yet be fully implemented.

The Proposed Rule and Voter List Requirements

The dispute centers on a regulation stemming from President Trump's March executive order targeting mail-in voting. Under the proposed rule, states would be required to submit information about voters who have requested mail-in or absentee ballots, along with barcode data associated with those ballots. The Postal Service would then use these lists to determine whether to deliver ballot mail.

During a Senate hearing, Postmaster General David Steiner confirmed that under the proposed regulation, the Postal Service would refuse to deliver mail-in ballots in states that fail to provide their voter lists. When asked directly whether ballots would still be mailed if a state refused to submit its absentee voter list, Steiner answered: "Under our proposed regulation, no. We would tell the state that we need the manifest."

The Legal Battle and Settlement Concerns

The NAACP challenged the rule, relying on a 2021 settlement from a prior lawsuit. That settlement, reached after the NAACP sued the Postal Service in 2020 over mail-in ballot delivery delays during the COVID-19 pandemic, required the Postal Service to prioritize the timely delivery of election mail through 2028. A federal district judge in Washington, D.C., agreed with the NAACP that the proposed rule would violate this settlement and blocked its implementation.

The appeals court panel disagreed, finding that the NAACP's challenge was premature because the rule had not yet been finalized. The panel also concluded the rule likely would not violate the settlement agreement even if finalized. Additionally, the court noted that the Trump administration would face irreparable harm if the rule could not be issued and implemented before the November 2026 general election, writing that "there can be no do over" once an election occurs.

Current Status and Next Steps

The appeals court's ruling does not end the legal dispute or determine whether the rule is ultimately lawful. Rather, it grants the Postal Service a temporary green light to continue finalizing the proposed rule while the broader appeal proceeds through the courts. The Massachusetts injunction remains in place, creating a legal split that may require further appellate review before any final implementation can occur.