A federal judge on has halted the U.S. Postal Service’s (USPS) proposed changes to its mail-in ballot delivery procedures, dealing another blow to President Trump’s effort to restrict the practice he has long criticized.
Postmaster General David Steiner confirmed last week that USPS would not deliver mail-in ballots in states that refuse to hand over sensitive voter data to the Trump administration, telling lawmakers it was meant to ensure the “right ballots are going to the right people.”
District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on Wednesday sided with the NAACP’s argument that the proposal violates a December 2021 settlement agreement that required the Postal Service to “prioritize monitoring and timely delivery of election mail” through the 2028 elections.
The proposed changes were in line with a March executive order directing USPS to propose a final rule by August 3 that requires states to compile a list of eligible voters at least 60 days before any federal election and prohibit mail-in or absentee ballots from being sent to anyone not on those lists.
Sullivan, a Clinton appointee, wrote in a 19-page opinion that Trump’s order was “designed to exert federal control over who in the United States may be sent a mail-in or absentee ballot in federal elections by the Postal Service.”
The NAACP asked the court in early June to force USPS to comply with the settlement agreement, arguing that the agency was disregarding its obligation to take “extraordinary measures” to ensure mailed ballots are processed in a timely manner.
The group also contended that new procedures would “inevitably” result in large numbers of qualified voters being disenfranchised, especially minority voters who are more likely to rely on mail-in voting.
“The proposed USPS changes would have created unnecessary and unlawful barriers, in direct violation of the USPS’s mandate to prioritize election mail,” Anthony P. Ashton, senior associate general counsel at NAACP, said in a statement on Wednesday.
“This decision makes clear that access to the ballot cannot be tied to arbitrary requirements,” he added.
Sullivan rejected the Postal Service’s arguments that the challenge was brought prematurely, and that the court had limited ability to intervene because the proposed rule fell outside the purview of the settlement agreement.
Wednesday’s order is the second defeat for the Trump administration on this issue in as many weeks.
A Boston-based federal judge struck down the executive order last Thursday, finding that it infringed on the states’ constitutional authority to regulate the administration of elections.