A federal judge has halted the U.S. Postal Service’s attempt to impose new restrictions on the handling of mail-in ballots, ruling that the proposal breached an existing court settlement designed to safeguard timely ballot delivery.
The decision, delivered Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington, marks another legal setback for President Donald Trump’s efforts to tighten rules surrounding mail-in voting before the November 3 midterm elections. Republicans are expected to face a closely fought contest as they seek to retain control of both chambers of Congress.
The Postal Service had introduced a proposal in May that would have required states to meet a series of new conditions before election ballots could be delivered through the mail. Under the plan, states would have needed to provide voter lists and adopt revised ballot-handling procedures. States failing to comply risked having their ballots withheld from delivery.
Judge Sullivan concluded that the proposal conflicted with a 2021 settlement reached with the NAACP. That agreement obliges the Postal Service to take “extraordinary measures” to ensure election mail is delivered promptly through 2028.
The ruling prevents the Postal Service from enforcing the proposed policy while the legal dispute continues.
Neither the U.S. Postal Service nor the U.S. Department of Justice immediately issued public comments following the decision.
The disputed proposal stemmed from an executive order signed by Trump in March. The order instructed the Department of Homeland Security to compile state-by-state lists of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote and directed the Postal Service to deliver ballots only to voters appearing on approved state mail-in ballot lists.
The latest ruling follows another courtroom defeat for the administration just last week. On June 25, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani temporarily blocked implementation of the broader executive order after a coalition of Democratic-led states challenged it.
In that case, Judge Talwani found that the president had exceeded federal authority by attempting to reshape election procedures, an area that has traditionally been administered by state and local governments since the founding of the United States.
Trump has repeatedly argued that mail-in voting is vulnerable to fraud, although he has not presented evidence demonstrating widespread abuse. Election officials and numerous court rulings have consistently found no proof of large-scale fraud capable of altering national election outcomes.
