The Mail-In Voting Rule: A Last-Minute Power Grab

The latest twist in the ongoing saga over mail-in voting has played out in courts across the country. Twenty-three states and Washington D.C. have filed a lawsuit to block a new U.S. Postal Service rule implementing President Trump’s executive order on mail-ballot security, which was temporarily allowed by the Supreme Court after it was challenged too soon.

The controversy centers around a 95-page USPS rule that requires election officials to submit each mail voter’s name and address to a new portal, along with unique barcodes assigned to the envelopes used to send and return ballots. Election officials must also submit their outgoing and return ballot-envelope designs for review before accepting outgoing ballot mailings.

The states argue that this last-minute requirement could prevent eligible voters from receiving ballots due to administrative errors, technical failures or delays. With less than 10 weeks left until the midterm elections, election officials have already designed and purchased envelopes, leaving little time to comply with the new rule. As California Governor Gavin Newsom put it, “Trump does not run elections. States do.”

The coalition’s complaint is multifaceted, arguing that the rule exceeds USPS’ statutory authority, violates the Voting Rights Act, and intrudes on states’ constitutional power to administer elections. They also contend that requiring them to identify mail voters to USPS violates federal privacy protections governing records of individuals’ First Amendment activity.

The Supreme Court had allowed the executive order to proceed, but its decision did not establish the legality of Trump’s order or the policies implementing it. In fact, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that “courts review final rules, not proposed rules.” The administration is now using a last-minute power grab to impose its will on states.

The White House has defended the policy as necessary for mail-ballot security, but critics argue that this is merely a pretext for voter suppression. While the rule would improve ballot tracking and reduce the risk of fraud, according to USPS, it also raises concerns about privacy and potential misuse of voter information.

Similar attempts to manipulate elections have been seen in the past, often under the guise of security or voter integrity. This pattern should be alarming for anyone who values democratic institutions.

The fate of this rule remains uncertain, with USPS barred from implementing it for the November election due to a separate nationwide injunction. The Supreme Court will likely have the final say, but states are left to navigate the administrative complexities of this new rule as they head into the midterms.

The administration’s actions will have far-reaching implications for the integrity of our electoral process. As voters, election officials, and democratic institutions wait with bated breath, one thing is clear: the stakes could not be higher.