US appeals court keeps block on Trump mail-in voting rules
This digest was compiled by AI from multiple sources — links to the originals are below.
A US appeals court declined to lift an injunction blocking new Postal Service rules for mail-in voting, with less than eight weeks before the November 3 midterm elections. The First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled Thursday against the Trump administration, citing potential chaos and disenfranchisement. The Supreme Court is weighing a similar request.
Key Facts
- The First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston declined to lift an injunction against the USPS mail-in voting rules on Thursday.
- The rules require states to redesign mail-in ballots with unique scannable barcodes and submit voter lists to the Postal Service.
- The appeals court cited the lower court's findings of 'chaos and widespread disenfranchisement' if the rules took effect before November 3.
- The US Supreme Court is currently weighing a similar request from the Trump administration.
The Court Ruling
The First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston declined to lift an injunction against the USPS mail-in voting rules on Thursday. The appeals court denied the Trump administration's motion to dismiss the injunction, citing potential confusion ahead of the midterm vote. It affirmed parts of the lower-court ruling issued by US District Judge Indira Talwani, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama. The court said the district court made detailed findings about 'chaos and widespread disenfranchisement' that would occur if the Final Rule took immediate effect.
The Postal Service Rules
The finalized rules released by the US Postal Service in late August direct states to redesign mail-in ballots to include unique barcodes that can be scanned. States would also be required to submit a list of voters slated to receive ballots by mail. The Postal Service would retain the right to not transmit mail-in or absentee ballots if the mail-outs do not comply with the new standards or if voters do not appear on the submitted lists.
Legal Arguments
A coalition of voting rights advocacy groups, including the League of Women Voters, argued that the new rules would effectively disenfranchise certain voters who rely on mail-in ballots. The Trump administration argued that the rules are necessary to ensure election security. The US Department of Justice argued that the plaintiffs' case appeared to be based on an unfounded premise that the Postal Service intends to seize control of election administration. The DOJ emphasized that state election officials would retain full control over who is permitted to vote by mail and that the Postal Service's role would be limited to ensuring envelopes comply with the new design requirements.
1 source
Time · lag behind first