Maine sued the U.S. Postal Service over a rule requiring states to submit mail-ballot voter information and follow federal mailing standards.
The state joined a 25-state coalition on August 26, 2026, seeking to block the requirements. The dispute is not finally resolved. A federal judge temporarily barred enforcement for elections through November 3, 2026, but USPS has asked the Supreme Court to lift that order.
Table of Contents
- What the USPS rule required
- Why Maine challenged it
- What the judge decided
- What the ruling means for voters and states
What the USPS rule required
The rule covered mail-in and absentee ballots for federal elections. For its purposes, both terms mean any ballot sent through the U.S. mail, regardless of the wording used by a state.
States using ballot mail would have to: The USPS final rule took effect on August 21, 2026. Noncompliant ballot mail could be withheld from mailing, including when required voter enrollment, portal registration or envelope approval was missing. The rule followed President Donald Trump's March 31 Executive Order 14399. That order directed USPS to transmit mail ballots only to voters included on a national list of eligible voters.
- Follow USPS-approved standards for outbound and return envelopes.
- Register for a Federal Ballot Mail Portal.
- Enroll eligible mail and absentee voters in the portal.
- Satisfy those conditions before USPS accepted the ballot mail.
Why Maine challenged it
Maine argues that USPS unlawfully moved beyond transporting mail and into regulating state election procedures. The coalition's claims include challenges based on USPS governing laws, the Constitution, the Privacy Act and federal voting-rights law. Timing was also central to the case.
According to the Maine attorney general's account of the lawsuit, election officials would have only weeks to build data systems, revise procedures, train workers and explain the changes to voters. The states contend that rushed or inaccurate records could prevent an eligible voter from receiving a ballot. Their challenge does not rest only on administrative inconvenience; it alleges a direct risk to voting access.
📨 Get Free News Stories Alerts
Free · No spam · Unsubscribe anytime
What the judge decided
On September 4, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a preliminary injunction. This is a temporary court order that restricts enforcement while litigation continues, not a final judgment on the rule.
The order bars USPS from enforcing the mandatory envelope review, portal registration, voter enrollment and related provisions for elections held on or before November 3, 2026. It prevents ballot mail from being rejected under those requirements during the covered period. In the district court's ruling, Talwani found that the plaintiffs were likely to show USPS exceeded its statutory authority. Congress had not authorized the agency to impose these pre-mailing conditions on states, the court concluded.
What the ruling means for voters and states
The injunction means the challenged requirements cannot currently serve as mandatory conditions for federal ballot mail in elections through November 3, 2026. States may still comply voluntarily. The order does not permanently invalidate the rule or address elections after November 2026. USPS may continue developing its portal and offer voluntary participation without pre-acceptance verification.
The case also remains subject to rapid change. The Supreme Court docket shows that USPS sought a stay of the injunction and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson ordered responses by September 9. Voters should rely on instructions from their state or local election office rather than assume the court fight changes how they request or return a ballot. As of September 7, the injunction remained temporary and Supreme Court review was pending.
You Might Also Like
- Connecticut sues Kalshi to block unlicensed sports gambling operations
- Alabama attorney general investigates OpenAI over Hugging Face data breach
- What Happens Between Indictment and Trial