The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the Trump administration to begin implementing an executive order that restricts mail-in voting, pausing a lower court injunction that had blocked the order across 23 states and the District of Columbia just months before the November midterm elections.
In an unsigned, 10-page opinion, the court’s majority ruled that a federal judge in Boston acted prematurely when she barred the government from applying provisions of the order. The justices said the states had not yet suffered the kind of injury that allows a lawsuit to move forward, because the order has not yet been carried out.
What the Executive Order Would Do
Signed by President Donald Trump in March 2026, the order would require the Department of Homeland Security to send each state a list of citizens over 18. States using mail ballots would be required to submit voter lists to the federal government, and the Postal Service would refuse to deliver mail-in ballots in states that do not comply. The order also imposes new design standards and ballot-tracking requirements on mail ballots.
A separate ruling by the same judge, in a case filed by different plaintiffs, temporarily prohibits the Postal Service from implementing one provision of the order nationwide. That ruling remains in effect.
Dissent and Reaction
The court’s three Democratic appointees dissented. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing a 23-page opinion, accused the majority of taking its eye off the ball and missing the Government’s actual objective: to secure its imprimatur for an effort to foment chaos ahead of the November elections.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Elena Kagan, wrote a four-page opinion arguing the majority’s ruling does not address whether the President’s attempts to interfere with States’ administration of the November 2026 elections are lawful. She added that the decision merely postpones adjudication of those challenges.
Election law professor Rick Hasen of UCLA wrote on the Election Law Blog that the trial court will likely issue a new injunction to block the Postal Service’s now-final rules, and that the case could reach the Supreme Court again within a week.
The Supreme Court’s ruling did not address the second injunction or the Postal Service’s final rules, issued Friday, leaving significant legal and practical uncertainty about whether any restrictions can be implemented before November. Mail-in and absentee voting begins in some states within one month.
discussion