Federal Judge Blocks Unlawful New USPS Rule on Mail Voting

BOSTON — Today, a federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a new order blocking the United States Postal Service (USPS) rule that would have implemented last-minute and confusing changes to mail voting at the behest of the president’s unlawful March 2026 executive order.

Earlier this summer, the same court blocked the president’s unlawful executive order that instructed the USPS to change how it implements mail voting procedures. The U.S. Supreme Court lifted that order, holding that the district court’s ruling was premature because USPS had not yet adopted a final rule to implement the executive order.

Now, following USPS’s publication of its final rule, the district court has once again blocked the administration from enforcing that rule and giving effect to the president’s unlawful executive order.

Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and Democracy Defenders Fund (DDF), on behalf of our clients the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Arizona Students' Association (ASA), Secure Families Initiative (SFI), the city of Madison, Wisconsin, and Travis County, Texas, filed an amicus brief in this case to provide the court with additional information from an expert witness about the impossibility of implementing USPS’s new rule in time for the 2026 midterm elections without having disastrous impacts on both voters and election administrators.

In its opinion, the court relied on this expert witness’ testimony, which concluded that “[n]one of the Rule’s requirements can feasibly be implemented before the November 3, 2026 General Election.”

Campaign Legal Center, Democracy Defenders Fund and our clients are challenging the USPS rule in a separate case ongoing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“From the moment the president issued his unlawful executive order, the goal was to sow chaos, confusion and doubt in our electoral process,” said Anna Baldwin, director of voting rights litigation at Campaign Legal Center. “This ruling is a win for the millions of voters across the country who rely on mail voting. Campaign Legal Center is proud to have played a part in securing this important victory, and we will continue to litigate in our case in Washington, D.C., to ensure that this illegal rule is permanently blocked so all voters can make their voices heard in November.”

“Today’s decision is a victory for the millions of Americans, including Latino voters, seniors, veterans, military families, and rural voters, who rely on voting by mail to make their voices heard,” said Juan Proaño, CEO of LULAC. “Changing the rules just as ballots are about to be sent would force voters and election officials to navigate new requirements at the worst possible time. The president does not have the authority to take control of our elections. Eligible voters should not lose their right to vote because of his unlawful attempt to do so.”

“The legal whiplash over the last few weeks surrounding this unlawful Executive Order - it has deeply concerned military and overseas voters, for whom mail-in voting is not a luxury but a necessity,” said Sarah Streyder, Executive Director of Secure Families Initiative. “We are grateful and relieved to have this terrible policy blocked before it could disenfranchise our voters this November, and we remain steadfast in our efforts to block it permanently.”

“Today we celebrate the legal win for protecting mail-in voting, especially for students and young people across the county. But make no mistake, this administration will continue to chip away at our systems wherever they can. Stopping this rule is just one step in our fight for our democracy. We will continue to organize our communities, educate our peers, and show up at the polls — because democracy works best when we all have a voice,” said Jessica Mendoza, executive director of Arizona Students’ Association.

“Election integrity is the backbone of a healthy democracy,” said Travis County Clerk Dyana Limon-Mercado. “Today’s decision makes clear that no individual can put politics above the law and unilaterally rewrite our election rules. Manufacturing doubt and spreading misinformation do not protect elections — they undermine voters’ rights, erode public trust, and risk disenfranchising entire communities.”

"Local election clerks do a phenomenal job administering fair, accurate, and safe elections. Last-minute politicking needlessly makes it more difficult for nonpartisan public servants to do their jobs," said Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway. "I'm relieved by today’s decision and hope it sends a clear message that our democracy is too important to be trifled with."

“Today’s decision is an important step toward protecting election administration,” said Tianna Mays, legal director at Democracy Defenders Fund. “The president does not have the power to rewrite election rules by executive order. Forcing states and election officials to make sweeping changes on the eve of an election could create widespread confusion and prevent eligible voters from having their ballots counted. We are hopeful that the courts will continue to uphold the U.S. Constitution and prevent this desperate attempt to seize power and interfere in the election.”

Background:

On March 31, 2026, President Trump signed an executive order (EO) purporting to impose new requirements for mail-in voting; create a national database of “verified” eligible voters based on faulty information; and direct the USPS to only send mail-in ballots to certain individuals. 

After months of litigation and multiple court orders blocking the president’s unlawful EO, one case challenging the order reached the Supreme Court. Campaign Legal Center’s President Trevor Potter filed an amicus brief urging the Court not to block a lower court ruling pausing the order from going into effect.

The Supreme Court issued an order on the shadow docket pausing this lower court order on August 24, 2026.

The Supreme Court order stated that its decision to stay — or pause — the lower court’s order was based on the timing of the plaintiffs’ claims, not on the merits of whether the president’s executive order was lawful. The lower courts, according to the Supreme Court, acted too soon when they issued orders blocking the enforcement of the president’s executive order.

By pausing this lower court order, the Supreme Court allowed the USPS to issue its final rule on implementing provisions in the president’s executive order.

Following the issuance of its final rule, Campaign Legal Center filed an additional complaint in our case against the executive order and amicus briefs in several similar cases across the country, including in the District Court of Massachusetts.

The new USPS rule is a threat to Americans’ freedom to vote. In addition to imposing barriers to Americans attempting to register to vote, the new rule will make it harder for jurisdictions like the city of Madison, Wisconsin, and Travis County, Texas, to administer elections.

The president’s executive order — which forms the basis for the new USPS rule — remains unlawful under the U.S. Constitution, which gives the authority to set election rules only to the states and Congress.