Judge Says USPS Defied Mail-Ballot Injunction

Judge Says USPS Defied Mail-Ballot Injunction

The News

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the U.S. Postal Service violated her nationwide injunction when it finalized President Trump's mail-ballot rule — but she declined to do anything about it beyond saying so.

"Defendants cannot contend that they misunderstood the scope of the court's order," Talwani, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote in a five-page ruling. "Accordingly, despite the Defendants' protestations that '[t]he United States takes its obligation to comply with court orders very seriously,' the court finds that Defendants violated the preliminary injunction in this case."

She then rejected the extra remedies sought by the plaintiffs, the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts and other voting rights groups, leaving the rule on track for publication Wednesday. She declined to take action "other than identifying the violation," and noted the final rule "may ultimately inure to Plaintiffs' benefit" — because it lets them challenge a completed regulation instead of a hypothetical one.

That order did not touch the League of Women Voters case. The administration argues it should: in an emergency motion, government lawyers wrote that "the Supreme Court's order leaves no room for any further dispute: this Court lacked jurisdiction to issue the preliminary-injunction in this case."

Timeline

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts found that USPS defied her Aug. 11 preliminary injunction by issuing the final rule Friday and sending it to the Federal Register with an immediate effective date.

Reactions

"But neither the Constitution nor Congress has given USPS any power to prescribe the rules around mail voting," the groups said in their filing.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called Monday's decision "a disgrace," saying "Trump's effort to turn the Postal Service into a voter suppression machine is blatantly unconstitutional." House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said the ruling was "sowing chaos in service to Donald Trump's effort to undermine our free and fair elections."

What's Next

Talwani's existing injunction still bars USPS from enforcing any of it for the Nov. 3 election, or from rejecting ballot mail that doesn't meet the administration's standards. She has not yet decided whether to vacate that injunction, as the administration asked her to do late Monday.

Democrats go back to court

Congressional Democrats and voting rights advocates filed new challenges Tuesday, one day after the high court ruled. The final rule, they wrote, turns the Postal Service "into a national gatekeeper for mail voting in federal elections."

Talwani also gave the Democratic-led states permission to update their challenge. California said it intends to file a new lawsuit over the executive order. Democratic-led states have said the rules upend election plans already in motion — some have already bought envelopes that would not comply.

The clock

Ballots start moving soon. North Carolina must send ballots to military and overseas voters by Sept. 4. Under the Constitution, states run elections — the core question in every one of these cases is whether the president can set mail-ballot terms anyway.

More

What the rule does

The rule carries out Trump's March executive order directing the Postal Service to police mail voting. States that want to send ballots through the mail would have to give USPS 90 days' notice before an election and submit lists of eligible voters 60 days out. Outgoing and return ballot envelopes would have to be approved and carry unique barcodes so they can be tracked.

The administration says USPS would only check whether envelopes met the standards, not whether a voter is eligible to cast a ballot.

The Supreme Court's Monday order

The judge's rebuke landed a day after the Supreme Court handed the administration a procedural victory in a separate case brought by 23 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia. The justices found those states had sued too early, because the Postal Service had not finished its rulemaking — while noting that states could challenge a final rule if it caused them harm.

Charleston White Arrested Again on Florida Battery Charge

Border Patrol Rescues MS NOW Crew in Desert

Supreme Court Restores Missouri's Old House Map

Alaska Drops Felony Voter Charges Against Samoans

Trespasser Breaches Harris' Malibu Estate; No Arrest

Hegseth Pressed Downed Airmen Into 60 Minutes

Houthis Seize Mokha, Choking Saudi Oil Exports

Altman Rules Out OpenAI IPO This Year

Jury Acquits Lil Durk in Murder-for-Hire Case

Judge: Trump Broke Law Halving FEMA Staff

Maher Calls Democrats' Gaza Genocide Claim a Lie

Blizzard Revives StarCraft, Sends Diablo to Netflix

Trump's Queens Childhood Home Sells for $1.93M

Scientists Find New Virus in Tick Invading US

Britain Bans Settlement Imports; US States Threaten Payback

Prison Fire Kills 7 as Kurds Protest Killing

Kosovo Rallies for Ex-President Before Hague Verdict

Cruz Booed at GameDay Over College Sports Bill

Blast Hits Bulgarian Arms Plant Supplying Ukraine

DOJ Loses Nearly Every Protester Assault Trial