A federal judge has blocked the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out a core piece of President Donald Trump’s election executive order — and this time the ruling applies to the entire country. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani granted a nationwide preliminary injunction barring USPS from refusing to deliver mail-in ballots based on a federally created list of “approved” voters.
What the Executive Order Did
The order at the center of the case was signed on March 31 and titled “Ensuring Citizen Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections.” It directed federal agencies to compile lists of U.S. citizens and share them with states before elections. Crucially, it instructed the Postal Service to build a roster of approved mail voters and to refuse delivery of ballots to anyone whose name did not appear on that federally assembled list.
Supporters framed the order as a security measure — a way to confirm that only eligible citizens receive and return ballots. Critics saw something very different: an unelected federal agency effectively deciding whose vote would be delivered and counted.
From 20 States to the Whole Country
This is not the first time the order has run into trouble in court. In June, Judge Talwani blocked parts of it across more than 20 states that had challenged the policy. Monday’s decision goes much further, extending the block nationwide and enjoining the Postal Service from implementing the ballot-delivery provision anywhere in the United States.
At the heart of the ruling is a question of authority. Talwani wrote that “no law enacted by Congress delegates authority to control mail-in voting to USPS.” In her view, the Postal Service simply has no legal power to decide which ballots are delivered and which are not — a function that has traditionally rested with the states.
Who Brought the Case
The challenge was led by the League of Women Voters along with other voting-rights organizations. They argued that the policy risked disenfranchising eligible voters ahead of the November midterm elections, when millions of Americans are expected to cast ballots by mail. The judge agreed that the threat of voters losing their ballots was, in her words, “plausibly likely and imminent.”
The timing matters. With the midterms approaching, election administrators and voters alike need clarity about how ballots will be handled. A last-minute change to delivery rules could have created confusion in the exact window when mail voting ramps up.
Reactions and What Comes Next
Backers of the executive order maintain that verifying voter eligibility is common sense and say they intend to keep defending the policy. Opponents call it an unconstitutional overreach and have signaled they will fight any effort to revive the ballot provision. A preliminary injunction is not the final word — the underlying legal battle continues — but for now the Postal Service is barred nationwide from enforcing this part of the order.
What This Means for Americans
For everyday voters, the practical takeaway is straightforward: as things stand, your mail-in ballot cannot be withheld by the Postal Service based on a federal “approved voter” list. The rules that governed mail voting before the order remain in effect while the case moves forward, and states continue to run their own elections.
Stay informed on the stories that matter most. Follow Palmedia News on Facebook and bookmark palmedianews.com for breaking news and analysis.