Mail-in voting rides roller coaster of court rulings, with more to come

Last updated: September 15, 2026

The legal battle over mail-in voting ahead of the November 2026 midterms has moved fast this week, and reversed course more than once.

Multiple lawsuits and rulings all stem from a March 2026 Executive Order signed by President Trump calling for the U.S. Postal Service to get involved in mail-in voting like never before. Among other things, it orders the Secretary of Homeland Security to create and send “State Citizenship List[s]” to each state, and it requires the USPS to issue a rule that will, in part, require changes to bar codes on mail-in ballots to facilitate tracking.

On August 24, the Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration on a procedural question. Two days later, on August 26, a federal judge in Boston lifted the last remaining court order blocking the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing new mail-ballot requirements, clearing the way for the administration's restrictions to take effect.

But on August 27, that same judge reversed course again, issuing a new 14-day temporary restraining order that blocks the USPS final rule from taking effect. The order effectively reinstates, at least temporarily, the nationwide block on changes to mail-in ballot regulations.

Importantly, none of these rulings has declared the underlying policy in the EO is legal or unconstitutional. Each decision has turned on timing and procedure. The Boston judge scheduled a hearing for Sept. 3 to consider whether to convert the temporary TRO into a longer-lasting preliminary injunction.

The back-and-forth underscores how unsettled the legal landscape remains: the rule has now been blocked, lifted, and blocked again within the span of about two weeks, with the merits of Trump's EO still undecided by any court.

Many legal experts predict the matter will soon be before the Supreme Court again.

September 15 Update: The new USPS mail-ballot requirements will not take effect for the November midterms. On September 14, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to lift the preliminary injunction blocking the rules while litigation continues.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that the government was unlikely to succeed in challenging the injunction and had not met the requirements for emergency relief. Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed that the rules should not take effect for the November elections, writing that state and local election officials did not have sufficient time to reasonably implement them.

For voters, the immediate uncertainty is resolved: states can proceed with their existing mail-voting systems for the November elections. The underlying legal dispute, however, is not over.

Why It Matters

Any disruption to mail voting carries particular weight for women, who make up a large and growing share of the electorate. In fact, in 2024, roughly 91.3 million women voted compared to about 82.6 million men.

Women also have consistently outvoted men in both midterm and presidential elections, a pattern that appeared in the 2022 midterms and held again in 2024. And, according to U.S. Census Bureau data, in 2024, more women than men voted by mail.

In addition, women are also registered to vote at higher rates than men. In recent years, the female-to-male registration gap has typically been around 10 million; in 2024 it stood at 8.7 million.

Advocates note that mail voting is especially important for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking, for whom voting by mail can be the safest or only practical way to participate in democracy.

Because women rely on mail voting at high rates, added administrative hurdles to mail-in ballots such as new paperwork requirements, barcode mismatches, or rejected envelopes, could disproportionately affect their ability to vote smoothly if the rule ultimately takes effect.

The March 2026 Executive Order, Explained

President Trump's executive order — and the Postal Service rule that followed — can be broken down into a few key pieces:

● The goal: The administration says the order is meant to prevent noncitizens from voting, though research and election audits have repeatedly found this to be extremely rare.

● The mechanism: USPS must build a portal where state election officials submit the names and addresses of every mail voter, as spelled out in the final rule.

● Barcoded envelopes: States must use USPS-reviewed ballot envelopes marked with unique “Intelligent Mail” barcodes for both outgoing and returned ballots.

● Verification at the post office: Postal workers scan envelopes before accepting them, checking barcodes against the federal portal. Envelopes that fail this check can be rejected and sent back to election officials to fix.

● The legal question: Challengers argue the Constitution gives states and Congress — not the president or USPS — authority over federal election administration, and that the rule also violates the Voting Rights Act and federal privacy protections tied to First Amendment activity.

● USPS's defense: The agency says the rule improves ballot tracking and reduces fraud risk, and that it won't independently judge voter eligibility or cross-check the portal against state voter rolls.

What Now?

For voters, the immediate question is now settled: the new USPS requirements will not take effect for the November elections, and existing state mail-voting procedures remain in place.

The broader legal fight over the federal rule continues.

Election season is underway. Here's what we're watching—and why it matters for women (July 26)