In a significant move that could reshape the landscape of mail-in voting for the upcoming midterm elections, the Trump administration has approached the Supreme Court with a request to support an executive order from former President Donald Trump. This request aims to alter mail-in voting protocols, a change that could impact nearly half of the United States.
Supreme Court Appeal
The Department of Justice has petitioned the Supreme Court to temporarily halt lower court rulings that have blocked these extensive changes. This legal action follows Trump’s recent primetime address, where he reiterated his skepticism about election integrity, potentially setting the stage for multiple voting-related judicial challenges as the midterms approach.
Executive Order Details
In March, Trump instructed the federal government to compile a “state citizenship list” to determine eligible voters, ensuring that mail ballots are only sent to individuals on this list. Democratic leaders from 23 states and the District of Columbia have challenged this directive, arguing that the Constitution delegates the power to regulate elections to states and Congress, not the president. Concerns have been raised that these changes could be misused and lead to electoral confusion.
A Massachusetts judge has blocked the order for the states involved, with the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholding her decision recently. The executive order also mandates the sharing of federal citizenship lists with state officials and restricts the U.S. Postal Service to deliver ballots solely to listed individuals. Additional measures include using secure envelopes with unique barcodes for ballot tracking and potentially withholding federal funds from non-compliant states and localities.
Legal Arguments and Timeline
The appeal posits that Trump’s order provides “general policy guidance” without directly controlling state election procedures. Solicitor General D. John Sauer has requested that the Supreme Court quickly suspend the judge’s ruling as legal proceedings continue, labeling it as “indefensible.”
Sauer emphasized the urgency, stating that any new policies must be operational by August to influence the November elections. A response to the appeal is expected by August 3.
Mail-In Voting: A Controversial Topic
Trump has consistently criticized mail-in voting, despite using it himself, attributing his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden to this method and alleging it facilitates fraud, accusations unsupported by evidence. During a recent visit to a General Motors facility in Michigan, Trump reiterated his stance, advocating for Congress to enact his voter ID and proof-of-citizenship legislation.
Despite these claims, mail-in voting has gained popularity among all political affiliations, with federal data indicating that approximately 30% of ballots were cast this way during the 2024 presidential election. Studies, including a 2025 Brookings Institution report, have shown extremely low fraud rates, about four cases per 10 million ballots.
Judicial Decisions and Political Reactions
The Supreme Court has previously ruled against the Trump administration concerning mail-in ballots, permitting states to count ballots received post-Election Day. Trump’s executive order underscores his argument to prevent non-citizens from voting, an occurrence proven to be rare and punishable by deportation.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston halted the order’s implementation for the November 3 elections, while U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols in Washington, appointed by Trump, deemed it too premature to block the order. The California Attorney General’s office, leading the states’ lawsuit, and New York Attorney General Letitia James have not commented on the appeal, nor has the Postal Service, citing ongoing litigation.
