Supreme Court blocks new Postal Service rules for mail ballots in blow to Trump

CBS News · collected 2026-09-15 · by Melissa Quinn, Jacob Rosen
Read the original at CBS News ↗

Summary

The Supreme Court has upheld a lower court’s decision to block new Postal Service regulations for mail ballots, which were proposed by the Trump administration amid concerns about voter fraud. The ruling prevents changes from being implemented before November's midterms, citing insufficient time for states and local election officials to comply with the requirements. These rules include design standards for ballot envelopes and mandatory submission of voter information to an online portal. The decision was supported by a majority including Justice Brett Kavanaugh but opposed by Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
Written by the local model on 2026-09-15, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event.

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
38
claim-shaped sentences
Uncertain
13%
5 of 38 hedged
Leaning
Leans left
of the writing, not the subject
Correction & hedging signals
77.0
corrections and hedging in what we collected; not a measure of accuracy
Outlets on this story
unclustered
not grouped into a story yet
Narrative spread
1
articles carrying this framing
Analyzed 2026-09-15 · how these are computed

AI analysis (generated at analysis time, not now)

Why this leaning score
The article's own words the score was based on. Each is quoted verbatim and was checked against the article text before being stored, so you can find it in the original.
Score -0.35 Confidence medium 1 quote(s) discarded as not found in the article
Leaning score -0.35 for article 9929 (medium confidence, 1 verified quote) · logged 2026-09-15

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans left and hedges 13% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
ProPublica
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 17% hedged 5 of 29 📰 publisher trust 96
“The articles discuss different aspects of postal service issues regarding elections, but describe distinct events: one is an audit finding about handling ballots, and the other is a Supreme Court decision on new regulations.”
Reason
⚖️ Leans strongly left further left than this 🔴 13% hedged 3 of 23 📰 publisher trust 92
“The articles describe different court decisions related to Trump's actions on mail-in voting, but they involve distinct legal proceedings at separate times.”
Los Angeles Times
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 22% hedged 7 of 32 📰 publisher trust 95
“Article A discusses states warning the Supreme Court about chaos if it allows USPS mail ballot rules, while Article B reports on the Supreme Court's decision to block those rules. These describe different specific events.”
South China Morning Post · 0.87 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans left 🔴 40% hedged 2 of 5 📰 publisher trust 94
“Article A describes a decision by Judge Carl Nichols, while Article B discusses the Supreme Court's action on the Trump administration's request to overturn a lower court's order. They cover different judicial actions at distinct times.”
The Guardian · 0.90 cosine similarity
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 5% hedged 1 of 19 📰 publisher trust 60
“The articles refer to different courts making decisions on related but distinct rulings concerning Trump's attempts to restrict mail-in voting.”

Publisher

CBS News · 466 article(s) · 2 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 2 correction(s)
2026-09-14
The AI bubble is leaking air, some economists say. Should investors worry?
2026-08-24
Sean Grayson, convicted in killing of Sonya Massey, dies in prison, attorney says

Who wrote this

Jacob Rosen
9 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 Judge Cooper ruled in May that Mr. Trump's name had been added illegally and .
🔮 But he found that applying the rule in the November midterms "would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections."
🔮 In May, the FBI director also clashed with Democratic senators over allegations of excessive drinking — which he has strongly denied.
2026-09-15 · assertive framing · FBI Director Kash Patel to testify before Senate panel
🔮 "I'm perplexed as to what crime they could be prosecuting," Wainstein said, adding that the investigations are a "blatantly unconstitutional effort to target an innocent man."
🔮 He added that his wife, attorney Victoria Toensing, who also worked with the team of federal prosecutors in Fort Pierce, Florida, will be leaving the Justice Department on Friday.
🔮 That someone would harbor such hatred toward our way of life and seek to target the New York State Capitol and New York state senators - that's an attack on democracy itself, and one we will not tolerate."
🔮 In July 2025, FBI Director Kash Patel announced that the bureau would instead relocate a few blocks away, stating that the Reagan Building offered "the most cost-effective and resource-efficient way to carry out our mission." Last November, the state of Maryland sued Patel and the bureau, alleging that the Trump administration had attempted to "unlawfully sabotage" the 2023 plan and illegally divert funding that Congress had designated for the plan — over $323 million — away from it. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang sided with Maryland, writing in a 47-page opinion that the Trump administration's move to divert the funding and cancel the plan was "arbitrary and capricious and not in accordance with law," in addition to other violations of federal law.
🔮 The order, however, does not include language that would bar government restitution or payouts to convicted Jan. 6 rioters.
Also by Jacob Rosen
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 9 articles by Jacob Rosen →
Melissa Quinn
3 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 But he found that applying the rule in the November midterms "would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections."
🔮 "The Final Rule's new requirements would be an extraordinary amount of work for local officials at any time," she wrote.
🔮 The decision could be a boon for national Republican groups, which have amassed bigger war chests than their Democratic counterparts and can flood the airwaves with more ads in support of GOP candidates.
More on this subject from Melissa Quinn
All 3 articles by Melissa Quinn →

Topics

The Supreme Court The Trump administration Washington the Postal Service the Postal Service's

Subjects

the Postal Service ORG · 4× the Postal Service's ORG · 4× The Supreme Court ORG · 3× D. John Sauer PERSON · 2× Florida GPE · 1× Samuel Alito PERSON · 1× The Trump administration ORG · 1× Trump PERSON · 1× Washington GPE · 1× the District Court's ORG · 1×

Narrative

They added there would be "chaos" and said the new rules are "fraught with an extreme risk of error" that even if the states were to comply in time, "there is a high risk of technical breakdown, ineptitude, and delay," by the Postal Service. But the Trump administration has defended the regulations as "plainly constitutional" and said they impose only "modest" requirements for mail ballots.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-15
🔮 But he found that applying the rule in the November midterms "would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections."

Claims (38 extracted, 5 hedged)

The Supreme Court on Monday left intact a lower court decision that new regulations for mail voting, rejecting the Trump administration's effort to move forward with the rules in the run-up to the November midterm elections. asserted
Court → leave → elections
The court's decision keeps implementation of the Postal Service's requirements, finalized by the agency late last month, on hold while a legal challenge moves forward. asserted
challenge → keep → hold
Mail ballots have already gone out to voters in some states, and election officials at the state and local levels had for them to make the changes to comply with the new policies in time for the upcoming elections. asserted
them → go → elections
The Trump administration, meanwhile, had are needed to address the risk of fraud in mail voting, which Solicitor General D. John Sauer said is a "particularly pernicious species of fraud" that dilutes lawful votes and undermines public confidence in the integrity of elections. asserted
that → need → elections
But the administration has not come out with evidence of widespread voter fraud, and President Trump himself has voted by mail in Florida elections this year. asserted
Trump → come → elections
In a brief unsigned order, the Supreme Court said the government "is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the District Court's preliminary injunction." asserted
government → say → injunction
Two of the court's conservative justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, dissented from the court's ruling, arguing the states that sued over the Postal Service's new rules are unlikely to show the policy is unlawful. asserted
policy → dissent → rules
A third conservative, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, sided with the majority. asserted
conservative → side → majority
He wrote that "there is at least a fair prospect that the final rule falls within the Postal Service's statutory authority." asserted
rule → write → authority
But he found that applying the rule in the November midterms "would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections." asserted
officials → find → elections
Under the new rules from the Postal Service, mail ballot envelopes must meet certain design requirements, including unique barcodes, and state and local election officials must submit to an online portal certain information about voters who will receive mail ballots. asserted
who → meet → ballots
The Postal Service has said that any ballot mailings that don't comply with its requirements will be rejected and returned to election offices. asserted
that → say → offices
The policies have raised alarm with election officials who are concerned significant numbers of voters could be disenfranchised and fear that if the policies take effect, they would upend states' mail voting programs just ahead of the midterms. uncertain
they → raise → midterms
Democratic-led states and voting rights groups that are challenging the new rules said they unconstitutionally infringe on states' authority to administer elections. asserted
they → lead → elections
The Postal Service, they said, does not have the power to set rules for federal elections or mail voting. asserted
they → say → elections
In a filing last week, the states and voting rights groups argued that complying with the rule in time for the upcoming midterm elections would be "impossible" and said "millions of voters would be unable to vote by mail and some would not be able to vote at all." asserted
some → argue → mail
They added there would be "chaos" and said the new rules are "fraught with an extreme risk of error" that even if the states were to comply in time, "there is a high risk of technical breakdown, ineptitude, and delay," by the Postal Service. But the Trump administration has defended the regulations as "plainly constitutional" and said they impose only "modest" requirements for mail ballots. asserted
they → add → ballots
"The Rule's regulation of the U.S. Mail—not federal elections — is plainly constitutional," Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in a filing to the Supreme Court. asserted
Sauer → write → Court
"While the States have primary authority to regulate the manner of elections, they cannot choose to use the federal mails to carry out their elections but then insist that their election-related mail is somehow exempt from the Postal Service's rulemaking authority, conferred by Congress, to regulate envelope design and addressee information." asserted
mail → have → information
The Supreme Court's order caps a legal fight over Mr. Trump's efforts to restrict mail voting that reached a fever pitch late last month. asserted
that → cap → pitch
After the president in late March that called for the Postal Service to develop plans to regulate mail ballots and for the Department of Homeland Security to compile state-specific lists of residents who are U.S. citizens, a group of Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit challenging the directive. asserted
group → call → directive
Massachusetts-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani blocked the Trump administration from moving forward with key portions of the executive order, but the Supreme Court halted that decision on Aug. 24. asserted
Court → base → Aug.
In an unsigned 6-3 ruling, the high court said the states' lawsuit was premature, in part because the Postal Service hadn't finalized its plans. asserted
Service → say → plans
The Postal Service published its final rule laying out its new mail voting regulations just days before the Supreme Court issued its earlier order. asserted
Court → publish → order
Soon after, two dozen Democratic-led states filed a new lawsuit seeking to block the policies. asserted
states → lead → policies
Talwani issued a temporary order on Aug. 27 barring implementation of the rules for 14 days while she . asserted
Talwani → issue → days
The Justice Department appealed that decision, but as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit was weighing whether to halt that temporary order, the Trump administration went to the Supreme Court for relief. asserted
administration → appeal → relief
Before the Supreme Court could rule on the emergency request to freeze Talwani's order, the judge issued a preliminary injunction, which replaced her temporary order and blocked the Trump administration from requiring states to comply with the rule while the legal challenge continued. uncertain
challenge → rule → rule
The Trump administration then asked the Supreme Court for a third time to intervene in the case and withdrew its application for relief on the temporary order. asserted
administration → ask → order
Separately, a judge in Washington, D.C., also blocked the mail-in ballot rules on Sunday, following a lawsuit brought by the Democratic National Committee and several other groups. asserted
judge → block → Committee
During a hearing earlier this month, Talwani said the Postal Service's measure could lead to disenfranchisement, and she criticized the agency for failing to provide details about its plans. uncertain
she → say → plans
A senior Postal Service official said as of Sept. 3 that the agency was making "refinements" to the portal. asserted
agency → say → portal
While the battle over the mail-voting plans was continuing in the courts, an anonymous whistleblower filed a disclosure with Congress with the Postal Service's portal and systems. asserted
whistleblower → vote → portal
The official said the platform is "untested" and "rushed," and also warned that the new verification process for mail ballots could keep large numbers from being delivered to voters. uncertain
process → say → voters
Attorney General Letitia James, one of the Democratic officials who sued over the mail-voting rules, praised the Supreme Court's decision in a statement Monday. asserted
who → sue → statement
"Today, the Supreme Court protected one of our most fundamental, inalienable rights — the right to make your voice heard at the ballot box," she wrote. asserted
she → protect → box
"This last-minute change could have thrown our elections into chaos, and I am truly relieved the Court granted this reprieve." uncertain
Court → throw → reprieve
CBS News has reached out to the White House for comment. asserted
News → reach → comment
💬 Give feedback
🕘 History 🎫 Support