Judge Blocks Trump Again

A federal judge in Boston has once again temporarily blocked the Trump administration from enforcing new restrictions governing mail-in ballots, putting the changes on hold as states prepare for the November midterm elections.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a temporary restraining order Thursday night that prevents the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing its newly finalized rule for at least 14 days. The decision came after Democratic-led states and voting rights organizations filed a new challenge against the regulations.

Talwani said the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their argument that the Postal Service rule is unconstitutional and that the agency may not have had the legal authority to impose the requirements.

The judge also pointed to the timing of the dispute, noting that the midterm elections are now only a little more than two months away and that some states will soon begin sending absentee and overseas ballots.

Under the Postal Service’s new rule, mail-in ballots would have to meet specific design and technical requirements. Among other provisions, ballots would need to include a distinctive logo and a barcode containing an embedded ZIP code.

The rule would also require state and local election officials to provide the Postal Service with lists of voters who are eligible to receive ballots before the ballots are mailed.

The requirements stem from portions of an executive order President Trump issued in March as his administration sought to increase federal involvement in election procedures. Trump has repeatedly raised concerns about the security of mail-in voting and has argued that the system can be vulnerable to fraud, although widespread evidence supporting those claims has been limited.

The latest ruling is part of a rapidly changing legal fight that has already reached the Supreme Court.

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that an earlier lawsuit brought by Democratic-led states against Trump’s executive order had been filed too soon. The justices lifted a previous injunction that had blocked portions of the administration’s plans.

Following that ruling, Talwani lifted her remaining nationwide injunction on Wednesday. The judge had previously determined that the administration violated her order, but the Supreme Court’s decision changed the legal posture of the case.

The states and voting rights organizations then returned to court with a new challenge focused specifically on the Postal Service’s finalized regulation.

The plaintiffs argue that the federal government is intruding on states’ traditional authority to administer elections. They also contend that implementing the new requirements so close to the election could create confusion and potentially prevent eligible voters from successfully casting mail ballots.

Talwani agreed that the timing created significant concerns.

In her ruling, she said the states could face irreparable harm if they were required to comply with a regulation that the court believes is likely unconstitutional and that could be difficult to implement with the election approaching.

The judge also cited what she described as an “overwhelming risk” to Americans who depend on mail ballots, concluding that temporary court intervention was warranted.

For now, the Postal Service cannot enforce the disputed requirements while the temporary restraining order remains in effect. The legal battle is expected to continue as both sides argue over how much authority the federal government should have over the administration of mail voting.