The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 7-2 unsigned order, declined to disturb a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of a new U.S. Postal Service rule ahead of the 2026 midterms, drawing praise from officials in Michigan, Illinois, Colorado, and other states. The rule, issued after a March executive order from President Trump, would have required states to submit lists of mail-eligible voters and adopt standardized, trackable envelopes, with USPS withholding delivery of noncompliant ballots. The court said the government was unlikely to succeed on the merits given the midterms' proximity; Justices Alito and Thomas dissented, while Kavanaugh agreed the restrictions should not take effect for this election but suggested the government's underlying arguments could be reconsidered if similar rules were proposed earlier for a future election.
Michigan and 24 other states, including Illinois, sued within hours of the rule's publication, leading to a restraining order and then a Sept. 4 injunction that the high court left intact. Officials in Michigan, Illinois, and Colorado called the ruling a win for state authority over elections, while Trump denounced the decision on social media, criticizing the justices he appointed. The court did not rule on the rule's underlying legality, leaving that fight to continue in lower courts; existing mail-ballot processes remain unchanged as states begin distributing ballots for November. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the ruling turned partly on timing and that election-security efforts would continue beyond this cycle. In North Carolina, postal workers and union leaders have publicly defended mail-in voting's integrity amid ongoing fraud claims, as absentee voting proceeds under established security measures.
