What to Know About the USPS’s Rule for Mail-In Ballots

Read the original at TIME ↗
Cite

Schneid, R. (2026, August 24). What to Know About the USPS’s Rule for Mail-In Ballots. TIME. https://time.com/article/2026/08/23/what-to-know-about-the-usps-s-rule-for-mail-in-ballots/

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

TIME · collected 2026-08-24 · by Rebecca Schneid

Quick Summary

The United States Postal Service (USPS) has issued a 95-page final rule that requires employees to verify federal ballot mailings comply with new requirements before accepting them from election officials. The rule was designed to comply with President Donald Trump's executive order from March 31 and would take effect immediately if the government obtains relief from two existing injunctions. Two court orders, one issued by Massachusetts U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani on June 25 and another on August 11, block the implementation of this rule before midterm elections in November. Critics argue that Trump's executive order is an attempt to federalize oversight of elections, which is a duty reserved for states and Congress under the Constitution.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-08-24, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

The Trump Administration's Efforts to Restrict Mail-In Voting

President Donald Trump's executive order, issued on March 31, aimed to create a federal list of eligible voters and restrict mail-in voting by requiring states to use specific envelopes and barcodes. The US Postal Service (USPS) was instructed to deliver ballots only to those on the approved list.

However, this move was blocked by two court orders in Massachusetts, issued by Judge Indira Talwani on June 25 and August 11. These injunctions prevented the USPS from implementing the new rule before the midterm elections in November.

In response, the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which initially decided to allow the restriction of mail-in voting to proceed while the case was ongoing. This decision was seen as a preliminary victory for President Trump.

However, the Supreme Court's unsigned opinion did not declare the executive order lawful, and Democratic-led states argued that permitting the administration to push ahead with changes would contribute to pre-election chaos.

In response, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced that his state would sue again to block federal changes to mail voting. The California legislature also proposed two new laws that would make it a crime to interfere with the delivery of mail ballots, punishable by up to four years in prison.

The USPS has submitted a motion to dissolve one of the court injunctions blocking the implementation of the Trump administration's plan, and published new guidelines that could take effect if legal barriers are removed.

Written for “Trump's Mail Voting Restrictions” on 2026-10-16, grounded in this article and the 15 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Trump's Mail Voting Restrictions
Politics · 16 article(s) covering the same event. Compare every outlet's account →

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 6% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
NBC News
⚖️ Leans right further right than this 🔴 4% hedged 1 of 26 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles report on the Supreme Court's decision to lift an injunction and allow implementation of President Trump's executive order related to mail-in ballots.”
NBC News
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles describe the USPS's new rule and its relation to mail-in ballots, which was implemented after a Supreme Court decision in favor of President Trump.”
The Bulwark
⚖️ Leans right further right than this 🔴 0% hedged 0 of 4
“Article A reports on a rule issued by the USPS, while Article B reports on a Supreme Court decision allowing Trump to restrict mail-in voting, which is related but not the same event”
The Guardian
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 13% hedged 23 of 175 📰 publisher trust 68
“Article A reports on the USPS issuing a rule, while Article B mentions states suing to block it, indicating they are related but not the same specific event”
UPI
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 6% hedged 1 of 16 📰 publisher trust 56
“Article B describes a court's decision to block enforcement of mail-in voting restrictions, while Article A reports on a new USPS rule; although they are related, they describe distinct events in the timeline”
The Independent
⚖️ Leans left further right than this 🔴 10% hedged 4 of 41 📰 publisher trust 59
“Article A reports a USPS rule change implemented immediately if certain conditions are met, while Article B discusses a Supreme Court decision that reopens the legal battle around President Trump's directive”
NBC News
⚖️ Leans left further right than this 🔴 17% hedged 3 of 18 📰 publisher trust 95
“Article A reports that the USPS issued a final rule to implement new requirements for mail-in ballots, while Article B reports that a judge blocked this regulation before it could take effect”
The Guardian
⚖️ Leans left further right than this 🔴 9% hedged 2 of 23 📰 publisher trust 68
“Article A describes a USPS rule being implemented, while Article B reports on a federal judge halting Trump's executive order, which is related but distinct”
The Independent
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 11% hedged 2 of 18 📰 publisher trust 59
“Article A describes a rule being issued, while Article B describes a judge blocking key elements of that rule”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
31
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
6%
2 of 31 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
60/100
TIME's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
16
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-08-24 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

TIME · 611 article(s) · 1 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 1 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Rebecca Schneid
21 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 Why Trump’s wealth and the economy could matter in the midterms La Raja argues that the amount that constituents care about a politician’s enrichment or find it “unethical” often depends on how the country is doing overall.
🔮 Attendees wore purple ribbons and held signs that asked questions such as “Cornell, can you hear us now?” and “When will we start protecting survivors?”
🔮 “I began to understand that art could do more than inspire—it could preserve history and expand the way we see the world.”
🔮 President Donald Trump announced on Oct. 2 that 20.8 million eligible Medicare enrollees will receive a one-time $90 premium rebate from the government.
🔮 The Group of Seven (G7) countries said Friday that the nations would release 100 million barrels of oil and fuel products in the coming months, starting with “substantial” amounts of diesel.
🔮 Her attorney has separately criticized authorities’ handling of the criminal investigation, although observers say what’s known as the “voluntary intoxication loophole” in state law could limit what prosecutors are able to charge.
🔮 Ocone added that the men remain in custody and will be questioned by police.
🔮 Using a controversial move known as a “pocket rescission,” Trump said he wanted to nullify $810 million in spending that Congress had approved for programs and agencies, much of which would serve immigrants, minorities, and children.
🔮 “Go talk to the parents, talk to the teachers, talk to the administrators, and talk at the systems level because you could create all the content and it’s going to sit in a drawer.
🔮 President Donald Trump announced Sunday that his proposed “triumphal arch”—which is planned for Memorial Circle near the Virginia end of Arlington Memorial Bridge in Washington, D.C.—will serve as a military complex with drones, ammunition storage, and sniper facilities.
Also by Rebecca Schneid
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 21 articles by Rebecca Schneid →

Topics

The United States Postal Service USPS the Department of Homeland Security the Social Security Administration the Trump Administration

Subjects

USPS ORG · 12× Trump PERSON · 3× the Trump Administration ORG · 2× Donald Trump PERSON · 1× Indira Talwani PERSON · 1× Massachusetts GPE · 1× The United States Postal Service ORG · 1× U.S. District Court ORG · 1× the Department of Homeland Security ORG · 1× the Social Security Administration ORG · 1×

Narrative

Critics of the executive order have echoed that concern, saying that the Trump Administration is looking to force federal oversight on elections even though the duty is enshrined to states and Congress in the Constitution. “Yesterday’s new mail-in voting rule is an attempt to weaponize USPS as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to take over elections,” Michael McNulty, the senior policy director for government-reform nonprofit Issue One, said in a statement Saturday.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-08-24
🔮 It would require USPS employees to verify that outbound federal ballot mailings comply with new envelope, barcode, and data-reporting requirements before accepting them from election officials.
2026-08-24 · TIME
What to Know About the USPS’s Rule for Mail-In Ballots · assertive framing

Claims (31 extracted, 2 hedged)

The United States Postal Service (USPS) on Friday issued a 95-page final rule that it plans to implement immediately if the government obtains relief from two existing injunctions. asserted
government → issue → injunctions
It would require USPS employees to verify that outbound federal ballot mailings comply with new envelope, barcode, and data-reporting requirements before accepting them from election officials. asserted
mailings → require → officials
The rule was designed to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive order from March 31. asserted
rule → design → March
It directs the Department of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Social Security Administration, to compile and send lists of adult citizens in each state. asserted
It → direct → state
Separately, it directs USPS to establish state-specific lists of people to whom election officials intend to send mail-in or absentee ballots, along with unique ballot-envelope identifiers. asserted
officials → direct → identifiers
A pair of court orders blocks the rule from implementing the rule before midterm elections in November. asserted
pair → block → November
About the two injunctions blocking Trump’s mail-in voting order Two injunctions bar USPS from implementing its new rule. asserted
injunctions → block → rule
They were issued by Massachusetts U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani on June 25 and Aug. 11. asserted
They → issue → June
What the June Injunction Covers A coalition of 23 states, along with the District of Columbia, filed a lawsuit on April 3 seeking to block Trump’s executive order, arguing that the President does not have the authority to dictate state voting practices. asserted
President → file → practices
In June, the presiding judge granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs, finding two sections of the order unlawful and constitutionally invalid. asserted
sections → preside → order
It barred federal agencies from implementing those sections against plaintiff states and D.C. for elections held on or before Nov. 3. asserted
It → bar → Nov.
It also blocked USPS from refusing to transmit ballots based on whether voters appeared on the new state-specific lists. asserted
voters → block → lists
What the August Injunction Covers Voting-rights groups brought a separate lawsuit against the Trump Administration on April 2, claiming the executive order was unconstitutional, “dangerous,” and could disenfranchise eligible voters. uncertain
order → cover → voters
It resulted in the August injunction, which bars USPS from implementing, enforcing, or giving effect to the executive order’s mail-voting provisions for any elections ahead of or on Nov. 3. asserted
which → result → Nov.
It also prohibits USPS from completing the specified rulemaking for those elections. asserted
It → prohibit → elections
Talwani wrote that the executive order was “causing confusion and threatening both increasing chaos and an erosion of trust in our democracy.” asserted
order → write → democracy
She also concluded that “the executive branch has no authority to regulate elections.” asserted
branch → conclude → elections
Critics of the executive order have echoed that concern, saying that the Trump Administration is looking to force federal oversight on elections even though the duty is enshrined to states and Congress in the Constitution. “Yesterday’s new mail-in voting rule is an attempt to weaponize USPS as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to take over elections,” Michael McNulty, the senior policy director for government-reform nonprofit Issue One, said in a statement Saturday. asserted
McNulty → echo → statement
McNulty argues that the rule would shift postal workers “from neutral transporters of a state-led process to a federal gatekeeper of states’ outbound mail ballots.” However, the USPS has asserted in the final rule that the requirements “do not amount to election administration, nor do they usurp state resources.” “Rather, they regulate the use of the mail to improve operational efficiency and support the faithful execution of federal law,” it says within the rule. asserted
it → argue → rule
Voting-rights groups challenge the USPS mail-in ballot rule asserted
groups → challenge → rule
A coalition of voting-rights organizations has filed an emergency motion asking the federal district court to enforce its Aug. 11 injunction against USPS. asserted
coalition → file → USPS
The plaintiffs argue that issuing an immediately effective final rule, intended for possible use in November, violated the injunction. asserted
issuing → argue → injunction
USPS acknowledged that it would not implement the final rule for the 2026 election unless the government obtains relief from both injunctions. asserted
government → acknowledge → injunctions
However, the coalition argued that USPS issued the rule in violation of the Aug. 11 injunction, without seeking a stay or filing an appeal. asserted
USPS → argue → appeal
It also said that USPS could have given the rule an effective date that falls after the 2026 midterms without violating the injunction, while the “immediate” effective date could sow “chaos” and “confusion” ahead of November. uncertain
date → say → November
“Enforcement of the court’s preliminary injunction is necessary to hold this administration accountable for its unlawful action and make clear that voters can confidently cast their mail ballot free from federal interference this November,” said a statement on behalf of the plaintiffs, which includes the League of Women Voters, Association of Americans Resident Overseas, and the U.S. Vote Foundation. asserted
which → hold → Overseas
Postmaster General David Steiner defended the rule when it was proposed in June, saying at a Senate hearing that he “would think that states would want the information to ensure that the ballots that they think they’re sending out are the ballots that are actually getting sent out.” asserted
that → defend → that
TIME has reached out to USPS for comment. asserted
TIME → reach → comment
In late July, the Trump Administration asked the Supreme Court to stay the June 25 injunction while its appeal proceeds. asserted
appeal → ask → injunction
After Talwani issued the Aug. 11 injunction, the Administration urged the justices to address that second order as well through the pending proceeding—an approach the plaintiff states opposed. asserted
states → issue → proceeding
But unless the Aug. 11 injunction is separately stayed or lifted, or the Supreme Court expressly addresses it, it continues to bar USPS from implementing its new rule for the midterm elections. asserted
it → stay → elections
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support