The Aporia · Supreme Court Refuses to Block Lower-Court Ruling Against Trump's Mail-in Ballot Executive Order

Supreme Court Refuses to Block Lower-Court Ruling Against Trump's Mail-in Ballot Executive Order

Read the original at Reason ↗

Cite

APA MLA Chicago

Somin, I. (2026, September 15). Supreme Court Refuses to Block Lower-Court Ruling Against Trump's Mail-in Ballot Executive Order. Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/14/supreme-court-refuses-to-block-lower-court-ruling-against-trumps-mail-in-ballot-executive-order/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Quick Summary

The Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, declined to block a lower-court ruling against the Postal Service's policy implementing Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at restricting mail-in voting. Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed with the majority but added that state election officials needed more time to adapt to the new rules before upcoming elections. Justices Alito and Thomas dissented, arguing that the USPS has the authority under existing statutes to implement such policies despite concerns about federalism and separation of powers.

Written by AI on 2026-09-15, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

Postmaster General David Steiner announced that the U.S. Postal Service has halted work on a controversial computer system developed under President Donald Trump's executive order, aimed at limiting voting by mail. This decision follows Supreme Court rulings striking down the executive order and issuing injunctions against implementing it. The suspension was confirmed in an interview with The Associated Press, where Steiner, who previously worked as CEO of Waste Management, emphasized his agency’s role as independent from political directives despite navigating financial hardships and political turbulence caused by Trump's policies. Unlike Trump, who criticized the court decisions, Steiner avoided commenting on the rulings' merits or implications for voter eligibility ahead of critical midterm elections in November.

Written for “Trump Mail Voting Restrictions” on 2026-10-30, grounded in this article and the 46 other(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted

sentences that state something as happening or true

Uncertain

1 of 15 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")

Leaning

Leans strongly left

of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate

Publisher signals

67/100

Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.

Outlets on this story

Politics

Same framing elsewhere

articles that frame the event the way this one does

Analyzed 2026-09-15 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability

Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 1030 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected

Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

2026-10-02

Would a Firing Squad Have Been More 'Humane' for Christa Pike?

2026-09-26

"I Will Not Stand for Being Jerked Around … by Any Lawyer Who Practices Before Me"

2026-09-18

New Article: Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections: Bringing Clarity To The Necessary and Proper Clause

2026-09-05

Lawyers' Responsibility for Hallucinations in Briefs That They Sign

Who wrote this

Ilya Somin

23 article(s) here · 0 carrying a prediction

🔮 Some of those who vote for the "wrong" Dan Sullivan might rank the "right" one second.

2026-10-29 · assertive framing · Creating Voter Confusion About Candidates' Names is Bad - But Exploiting Voter Ignorance About Policy Issues is a Much Bigger Problem

🔮 It also adopts a properly restrictive definition of "rebellion" (which is one of the conditions that might justify federalization of the National Guard).

2026-10-26 · assertive framing · Ninth Circuit Rules Trump Illegally Federalized National Guard in Los Angeles

🔮 Today, the Trump Justice Department filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block Alaska Senate election results on the grounds they might be influenced by voter "confusion" between incumbent Republican Senator Dan S. Sullivan and a separate Republican candidate with a very similar name (Dan L. Sullivan).

2026-10-23 · assertive framing · Trump Sues to Block Alaska Senate Election Results Because of Potential Voter "Confusion"

🔮 And I think he actually agrees with me more than the framing of his post might suggest.

2026-10-17 · assertive framing · Who Should Defend Democracy?

🔮 I would like to thank Matt for his interesting and insightful response.

2026-10-17 · assertive framing · Libertarianism and Democracy Revisited - A Rejoinder to Matt Zwolinski

🔮 [I]t seems to me that those who are fully onboard the expansion-or-bust train should have to do more than simply assert that having four new Democratic appointees on the Court in 2029 would be a self-evidently "good" thing.

2026-10-16 · mixed framing · Steve Vladeck's "Hard Questions About Court Expansion"

🔮 The court ruled that federal law does not preempt these policies, and that if if it did, there would be a violation of the anti-commandeering requirements of the Tenth Amendment: Even were the Court to find that the United States has standing and the challenged provisions are preempted—both answered in the negative above—United States' claims would still fail because the anticommandeering doctrine of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States precludes relief.

2026-10-16 · mixed framing · Trump Loses Yet Another Sanctuary City Case - this Time Against New York City

🔮 But some would like to revive it.

2026-10-15 · assertive framing · Fusionism and its Limits

🔮 I wish there was something I could say to ease the continuing pain of the victims of the attack and their families.

2026-10-07 · assertive framing · Compendium of Writings on the October 7 War and Related Issues

🔮 What would they make of that language?

2026-10-06 · assertive framing · Justice Alito on Originalism

Also by Ilya Somin

Creating Voter Confusion About Candidates' Names is Bad - But Exploiting Voter Ignorance About Policy Issues is a Much Bigger Problem

2026-10-29 · Reason

Ninth Circuit Rules Trump Illegally Federalized National Guard in Los Angeles

2026-10-26 · Reason

Trump Sues to Block Alaska Senate Election Results Because of Potential Voter "Confusion"

2026-10-23 · Reason

Libertarianism and Democracy Revisited - A Rejoinder to Matt Zwolinski

2026-10-17 · Reason

Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.

All 23 articles by Ilya Somin →

Topics

Congress USPS the First Circuit the Postal Service's the Supreme Court

Subjects

USPS ORG · 4× Trump PERSON · 3× Congress ORG · 2× the First Circuit ORG · 2× the Postal Service's ORG · 2× Brett Kavanaugh PERSON · 1× Donald Trump's PERSON · 1× First Circuit ORG · 1× the District Court's ORG · 1× the Supreme Court ORG · 1×

Narrative

In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh states that he thinks "there is at least a fair prospect that the final rule falls within the Postal Service's statutory authority," but that the district court was still right to block it, under the Administrative Procedure Act "because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections."

framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-15

2026-09-15 · Reason

Supreme Court Refuses to Block Lower-Court Ruling Against Trump's Mail-in Ballot Executive Order · assertive framing

Claims (15 extracted, 1 hedged)

Earlier tonight, the Supreme Court, in a 7-2 ruling, refused to stay a lower-court decision blocking the Postal Service's policy implementing Donald Trump's executive order intended to curb mail-in voting. asserted

Court → refuse → voting

I have previously written about the First Circuit ruling in this case, and about how Trump's order is a blatant assault on federalism and separation of powers. asserted

order → write → powers

As is often the case with "shadow docket" decisions, the majority opinion offers almost no analysis. asserted

opinion → offer → analysis

But they do state that "[t]he Government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the District Court's preliminary injunction [against the USPS policy]." asserted

Government → state → policy

That indicates they believe that Trump's policy is indeed illegal, likely for reasons similar to those outlined by the district court and the First Circuit. asserted

policy → indicate → court

officials → concur → elections

In a dissent joined by Justice Thomas, Justice Samuel Alito argues that the policy is within the authority of the USPS, but bases it on statutes that nowhere mention altering mail-in ballot election rules, but only authorize USPS to make rules for the collection and delivery of the mail. asserted

that → join → mail

Alito largely ignores the massive federalism and separation of powers issues arising from conflating the latter with the former. asserted

Alito → ignore → former

In addition, as the district court and the First Circuit noted, twisting this language into a sweeping power to override state mail-in ballot rules raises serious "major questions doctrine" issues. asserted

twisting → note → issues

As the District Court noted, Congress must speak clearly when delegating a "highly consequential power" to the executive, and the power to rewrite state election rules is pretty obviously highly consequential. asserted

power → note → rules

and, to put it mildly, the statutes granting authority to the USPS come nowhere near clearly giving it such power. asserted

statutes → put → power

Indeed, they don't even mention voting rules. asserted

they → mention → rules

To put it a different way, inferring a power to regulate mail-in voting from a power to make rules necessary for the delivery of the mail is a classic example what Justice Antonin Scalia famously called "hid[ing] elephants in mouseholes," warning courts to avoid assuming Congress did that. asserted

Congress → put → that

The Trump administration claims there is a truly enormous elephant in a very tiny mousehole here. uncertain

administration → claim → mousehole

The Court was right to reject that position. asserted

Court → reject → position