Weeks before Americans begin casting midterm ballots, a federal judge has placed herself between the U.S. Postal Service and the nation's election infrastructure, ruling that newly imposed mail-ballot requirements likely exceed the agency's authority and encroach on powers the Constitution reserves for Congress and the states. Judge Indira Talwani's preliminary injunction reflects a recurring tension in democratic governance: the reach of administrative power and its capacity to reshape, or disrupt, the act of voting itself. With ballots already moving in some states and the Trump administrati
Federal judge extends block on USPS mail-ballot requirements ahead of midterms
Eligible voters face risk of disenfranchisement if mail ballots are rejected or delayed due to non-compliance with untested USPS requirements.
Nearly guarantee significant disenfranchisement for eligible voters
Mark
So a judge blocked the Postal Service from enforcing new mail-ballot rules. What exactly were those rules trying to do?
Mimi
The Postal Service wanted states to put unique barcodes on mail ballots and submit detailed voter information—names, addresses, those barcodes—to a federal portal. Then postal workers would verify each ballot before delivery, rejecting any that didn't meet the new design standards.
Luke
And the judge said that's unconstitutional. But I want to be clear on the reasoning. It's not that the rules are bad policy—it's that the Postal Service didn't have the legal authority to impose them in the first place, right?
Mimi
Exactly. Judge Talwani said the Constitution gives Congress and the states power over elections, not the Postal Service. The agency overstepped.
Mark
Why does the timing matter so much? The judge kept mentioning it.
Mimi
Because states are already in the thick of election administration—registering voters, maintaining lists, processing mail-ballot applications. Adding a completely new compliance system weeks before ballots go out is logistically crushing. Election officials said it's nearly impossible.
Luke
But we should note: the Postal Service says this is just modest information collection and shouldn't stop anyone from voting. That's their defense. The judge disagreed, but that's the administration's position.
Mark
Is the Postal Service's new system even ready?
Mimi
That's the thing—a whistleblower told Congress the portal is untested and development was rushed. The Postal Service says it'll be available for voluntary use next week, but that's cutting it incredibly close.
Luke
And we don't actually know yet if the verification process will work or if it'll jam up mail delivery. That's speculation on both sides at this point.
Mark
What happens next?
Mimi
The Trump administration is expected to appeal directly to the Supreme Court, bypassing the appeals court. This could be decided very quickly.
Luke
Which means the Supreme Court will have to rule on election authority and constitutional power in the middle of an active election cycle. That's the real stakes here.
El Pulso
- A federal judge has blocked USPS mail-ballot rules just weeks before midterm ballots are set to go out, warning they risk disenfranchising eligible voters on a massive scale.
- The contested rules would require states to redesign ballots with unique barcodes, submit detailed voter data to an untested federal portal, and submit ballot envelopes for postal review before delivery.
- Election officials nationwide say the mandates are technically and logistically impossible to meet in September, when they are already deep in the work of running elections.
- A USPS whistleblower has warned Congress that the agency's own verification portal is rushed and untested, raising the prospect that compliant ballots could still fail to reach voters.
- The Trump administration is expected to skip the appeals court entirely and take the fight directly to the Supreme Court, compressing an already urgent legal timeline.
- With some Wisconsin municipalities already mailing ballots and North Carolina beginning distribution Friday, the window for legal resolution is narrowing by the day.
Weeks before Americans begin casting midterm ballots, a federal judge has placed herself between the U.S. Postal Service and the nation's election infrastructure, ruling that newly imposed mail-ballot requirements likely exceed the agency's authority and encroach on powers the Constitution reserves for Congress and the states. Judge Indira Talwani's preliminary injunction reflects a recurring tension in democratic governance: the reach of administrative power and its capacity to reshape, or disrupt, the act of voting itself. With ballots already moving in some states and the Trump administration preparing to appeal to the Supreme Court, the question of who governs how Americans vote by mail may soon fall to the nation's highest court.
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani extended her block on new mail-ballot requirements imposed by the U.S. Postal Service, issuing a 49-page preliminary injunction that found the rules likely unconstitutional. The decision came after a Thursday hearing and was sought by two dozen Democratic-led states and voting rights organizations.
At the heart of Talwani's ruling is a separation-of-powers argument: the Constitution reserves election regulation to Congress and the states, and the Postal Service, she found, had no authority to impose design mandates and data requirements on how states run their elections. The timing made the problem worse. With states weeks away from distributing ballots, Talwani wrote that the requirements "nearly guarantee significant disenfranchisement for eligible voters."
The rules themselves are sweeping. States would be required to print unique barcodes on mail ballots, submit voter names, addresses, and barcode data to a federal online portal, and have ballot envelopes reviewed by postal workers before delivery — with non-compliant ballots returned rather than delivered. The Trump administration has called these modest informational measures. Election officials have called them impossible.
Their concern is not only logistical. A USPS whistleblower disclosed to Congress that the portal at the center of the system is untested and was developed under rushed conditions, raising the possibility that even compliant ballots could be caught in a broken verification process. The Postal Service has said the portal will be available for voluntary use within days — a timeline that itself signals how compressed the entire effort has been.
Some states are already past the starting line. Wisconsin municipalities have sent ballots, and North Carolina began distribution Friday. Most states plan to mail ballots around mid-September. The Trump administration is expected to appeal Talwani's ruling directly to the Supreme Court, bypassing the federal appeals court entirely. The legal and electoral clocks are now running together.
A federal judge on Friday extended her block on new mail-ballot requirements imposed by the U.S. Postal Service, ruling that the rules likely violate the Constitution and threaten to disenfranchise eligible voters just weeks before the November midterm elections. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a preliminary injunction barring the agency from enforcing the regulations, which were finalized and published in late August. The decision came after a hearing Thursday and a request for extended relief from two dozen Democratic-led states and voting rights groups.
In her 49-page ruling, Talwani found that the Postal Service exceeded its authority by establishing new requirements for mail ballots without congressional authorization. The Constitution reserves election regulation to Congress and the states, she wrote, and the Postal Service had no power to impose mandates on how states conduct their elections. The judge also said the new rules likely constitute an unconstitutional intrusion on powers that belong either to Congress or to individual states. She emphasized that the timing of these requirements—imposed just weeks before states begin distributing ballots—"nearly guarantee[s] significant disenfranchisement for eligible voters."
The rules at the center of the dispute require states and localities to meet specific design standards for mail ballots, including unique barcodes, and to submit detailed information about mail voters to an online Postal Service portal. That data includes names, addresses, and individualized barcodes for each voter. Once enrolled, voters would appear on state-specific "Mail-In and Absentee Participation Lists." Postal workers would then review and verify all ballot mailings before delivery, rejecting and returning any that fail to meet the new standards. The Trump administration has characterized these as modest informational requirements that should not prevent anyone from voting by mail.
Election officials across the country have pushed back hard, saying the requirements are both technically complex and logistically impossible to meet in the compressed timeframe before November. Talwani acknowledged this burden in her decision, noting that election officials are already consumed with voter registration, list maintenance, early voting administration, and processing mail-ballot applications. Adding these new mandates at this moment, she wrote, poses "greater difficulties than otherwise because election officials are actively administering elections." The work required would be extraordinary at any time; in September, it borders on the infeasible.
Concerns about the Postal Service's readiness have come from inside the agency itself. An anonymous whistleblower disclosed to Congress that the new mail-ballot portal is untested and its development rushed. The whistleblower warned that the Postal Service's verification process could prevent significant numbers of mail ballots from reaching voters. The Postal Service has said it continues to refine the portal and expects it to be available for voluntary use sometime in the coming week—a timeline that underscores the compressed nature of the entire undertaking.
At least two municipalities in Wisconsin have already sent out ballots, and North Carolina will begin distribution to certain voters on Friday. Most states plan to start mailing ballots around mid-September, leaving little room for error or adjustment. Because of Talwani's earlier order blocking implementation, the Postal Service is not currently requiring states to submit ballot envelopes for compliance review, though it has made that review available on a voluntary basis.
The Trump administration is expected to appeal Talwani's decision. During Thursday's hearing, government lawyers indicated they would bypass the federal appeals court and seek intervention directly from the Supreme Court if the judge ruled against them. The legal battle is moving at extraordinary speed, with the stakes centered on a fundamental question: who has the power to set rules for how Americans vote by mail. The answer will likely be decided in the coming weeks, as ballots begin moving through the mail system.
Citas Notables
The Constitution reserves election regulation to Congress and the States, Congress has not authorized the USPS to make requirements of States before permitting use of the USPS for mailing their ballots— Judge Indira Talwani, in her ruling
The Final Rule's new requirements would be an extraordinary amount of work for local officials at any time. But imposing these mandates on election officials at present poses greater difficulties than otherwise because election officials are actively administering elections.— Judge Indira Talwani, in her ruling
Quieres la nota completa?
Lee el original en CBS News ↗
Politics & Governance