USA · 15 September, 2026 · 3 min read
U.S. Supreme Court Temporarily Backs Trump Mail-In Voting Decree Until Further Notice
Supreme Court allows parts of Trump's mail-in voting order to take effect for now. Decision was 6-3, with liberal justices dissenting.
6 of 7 outlets skipped it: whistleblower alleges the USPS portal system is set up to fail and could derail midterms..
211outlets compared
Same story, two versions
tap a side to read it in full
ABC
“Sin embargo, la corte no se pronunció sobre otra orden judicial emitida por Talwani el 11 de agosto”Read the original ↗
ABC News
“The ruling did not address what is arguably the most controversial portion of the order”Read the original ↗
One framing stresses legal non-ruling on the August injunction; the other stresses a specific disputed clause.
Supreme Court backs Trump
The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily ruled in Donald Trump’s favor on mail-in voting, allowing the entry into force “until further notice” of a decree signed on March 31 to strengthen conditions for voting by mail.
The court’s conservative majority said the suspension of the decree by a federal district court at the request of states led by the Democrats harmed the federal government, while the states challenging the decree argued otherwise.
The decision left the scope limited, with the Court saying, “It does not mean that any measure the government takes to implement this decree will necessarily be legal.”
The decree provides for the creation, by the immigration and social security services, of a federal list of eligible voters, and the Postal Service would only be able to issue mail-in ballots to people listed on that roster.
The three progressive justices dissented, arguing that the states, responsible for organizing elections including federal ones, are directly affected by these changes to the electoral rules.
Midterms timeline and dissent
With less than two months ahead of the midterms on November 3, 2026, North Carolina began sending its first ballots on Friday while the rules that could govern their handling remain tied to the legal battle over Trump’s decree. A judge handling the case extended the suspension until Election Day, saying the “myriad of obstacles cited and the negligible time for officials to familiarize themselves with the new procedures… will render compliance with these rules by local and state officials virtually impossible.” Solicitor General John Sauer told the Supreme Court that “Once those ballot envelopes enter the mailstream, there is no retrieving them,” as the Trump administration sought to enforce restrictions while ballots begin entering states across the country.
The administration argued the requirements are a “lawful and modest exercise of rulemaking authority delegated by Congress to the Postal Service,” while Democratic-led states and voting rights groups said the changes are unconstitutional and election officials said there is not enough time to revise systems before November. The filing described the rule as requiring envelopes to include the official Election Mail logo, meet automation requirements, and carry unique barcodes, with states also having to submit envelope designs for review and provide the Postal Service information about intended ballot recipients.
USPS rules and local impact
The dispute over mail-in voting also includes USPS rules for ballot mail, with a temporary restraining order set to expire on Sept. 10 but potentially extend indefinitely as a federal district court judge prepares to rule.
In its emergency appeal, the Trump administration argued the rule imposes “modest” ballot design and review requirements on states and insisted the requirement to submit name, address, and barcode information of intended recipients is not onerous or intrusive.
Solicitor General John Sauer wrote that “The rule thus plainly does not seize control of states' administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail.”
Critics say the rules impede on states’ authority to run elections, and ABC News reported that Judge Indira Talwani found immediate implementation “threatens disenfranchisement of millions of United States citizens who seek to vote by mail.”
Separately, in Texas’ Tarrant County, officials voted to reduce polling locations by 92, cutting sites from 316 in the 2022 midterm elections to 224 for this year’s elections, as residents and commissioners argued over access and turnout ahead of the 2026 midterms.