LOS ANGELES, California, September 1, 2026 — On Monday, the Trump administration appealed to a federal appeals court to lift an order temporarily blocking a new mail-in voting rule. Then the rule would be placed ahead of Postal Service requirements before November’s midterm elections. The appeal was to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston.
The Rule in Question
States must provide USPS lists of voters they sent mail ballots under the rule. All envelopes to return ballots and the envelopes that you send them in would require their own unique tracking bar code. USPS announced the rule to put in place a March executive order that Trump signed.
That order came after years of Trump using baseless assertions that mail-in voting is rife with fraud. The rule specifically focuses on what the administration describes as sensitive handling of election mail. Its critics say that laces federal oversight into a process the Constitution hands to states.
The Judge’s Order
A temporary restraining order halting the rule was issued Thursday by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani. She ruled the provision threatened to disenfranchise voters and was probably enacted unconstitutionally. On Monday, Talwani refused to suspend her own order even though the administration had issued a request.
For 14 days her restraining order continues, giving her time to consider a more permanent injunction. A hearing on that more sweeping injunction is scheduled for Thursday. Rather than waiting for that hearing, the administration has now asked an appellate court to step in.
The Legal Fight
In their appellate filing, Justice Department lawyers labelled Talwani’s ruling “gravely mistaken.” They contended the suit is based on a “specious premise that says USPS wants to run federal elections.” The rule “further improves and modernizes USPS’s infrastructure… is completely within the scope of USPS’s statutory and constitutional authority,” according to the filing.
The original challenge to the rule was brought by Democratic-led states and voting rights advocates. The state says those barcode and voter-list requirements constitute Congress overstepping its bounds when it comes to state election authority. The two sides are framing the appellate battle as a showdown between executive power and election administration.
A Possible Supreme Court Path
The administration could appeal back to the Supreme Court if the 1st Circuit does not intervene. The court’s 6-3 conservative majority last week stayed another injunction Talwani had issued in the case. That earlier ruling points to the possibility that the high court could be a more hospitable setting for the administration.
The lawsuit is among dozens of election-related cases as November approaches. A near-final settlement could arrive only weeks before ballots start going out to voters. The U.S. Postal Service has information about mailings for elections to federal offices at the United States Postal Service official site.
The barcode requirement, voting rights groups say, also raises distinct concerns about protecting ballot secrecy. State election officials are closely monitoring the appeal because of what it could mean for how long they have to process ballots. How the courts ultimately rule on that — and other mail-in voting questions — could define the way in which that type of voting is conducted around the country long after this election cycle.
The case, according to legal scholars, is a test of how broadly federal agencies can reach into voting systems managed by the states. Appellate court dockets and filings are accessible via the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Both parties have shown they consider this fight important for future election administration disagreements. Federal statutory authority guidelines can be viewed at the National Archives and Records Administration. Nonpartisan voting assistance information is available through the Federal Voting Assistance Program. A final ruling is not expected until ballots start arriving in the hands of voters this fall.
