1 Trending: ‘He Set An Example’: Conservative Activists, Lawmakers Remember Charlie Kirk A Year After His Death

2 Trending: Politico Hocking Lobbyist PR Shows Just How Corrupt The Washington Media Bubble Is

3 Trending: How Red States Are Replacing Woke College Classes With Real Education

4 Trending: Charges Against Chinese Telecom Giant Spotlight CCP-Sponsored Intellectual Property Theft

SCOTUS Blocks Trump’s Mail-In Voting Order Ahead Of Midterms

‘The plaintiff States cannot claim the timing of the rule tilts the equities in their favor when they, and courts hearing their claims, are responsible for so much of the delay,’ wrote Justice Alito in dissent.

Share Article on Facebook

Share Article on Twitter

Share Article on Truth Social

Share Article via Email

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to pause a lower court blockade on Monday night against President Trump’s mail-in voting executive order ahead of the 2026 midterms. The vote was presumably 7-2, with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissenting.

In its unsigned opinion, the high court rejected the Trump administration’s emergency application to stay a Sept. 4 decision by Massachusetts-based District Judge Indira Talwani. The Obama appointee and past Democrat donor issued a preliminary injunction blocking part of the U.S. Postal Service’s new policy that complies with the president’s mail-in voting order. The USPS rule “would require election officials to submit ballot-envelope designs for approval and upload voter information and unique tracking barcodes to a new USPS portal,” as described by Fox News.

The preliminary injunction replaced a temporary restraining order Talwani had issued against the new rule days prior. The Trump administration — which initially appealed the TRO to SCOTUS — withdrew its initial application over the TRO and filed a new one asking the high court to pause Talwani’s injunction.

The Supreme Court previously overturned a separate injunction by Talwani against Trump’s mail-in voting order last month. In a 6-3 ruling, the high court ruled that it was too soon for courts to consider the challenge brought by Democrat-led states and D.C. because the administration had yet to issue rules at that time, as required by the president’s edict.

The challengers — which also included left-wing groups like the League of Women Voters — then amended their lawsuits after the Postal Service published its rule, prompting Talwani’s latest blockade against the order.

In its short ruling, the Supreme Court determined that the Trump administration “is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge” to Talwani’s injunction. The majority further contended that “the equitable factors applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this Court do not favor a........

© The Federalist