{"id":474,"date":"2026-08-03T22:07:41","date_gmt":"2026-08-03T22:07:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474"},"modified":"2026-08-03T22:07:41","modified_gmt":"2026-08-03T22:07:41","slug":"states-challenging-executive-order-on-mail-in-voting-ask-justices-to-leave-in-place-limits-on-its-implementation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474","title":{"rendered":"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Lawyers for a group of 23 states and the District of Columbia on Monday afternoon urged the Supreme Court to leave in place by a federal court in Boston that barred the federal government from applying provisions of an executive order on mail-in voting to those states in the November elections. In , the challengers told the justices that granting a request to pause the lower court\u2019s order \u201cwould allow the federal government to rush out an unprecedented, legally indefensible voter-verification and ballot-interception program that would, among other things, give the U.S. Postal Service far-reaching new powers and responsibilities.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read more Born free and equal<\/a><\/p>\n

President Donald Trump issued the executive order on March 31, 2026. The provisions at the center of the dispute now before the court require several different government agencies to take action. One provision instructs the Department of Homeland Security to create lists of the adult U.S. citizens in each state and to send those lists to states at least 60 days before a federal election. Another provision directs the U.S. attorney general to \u201cprioritize the investigation and, as appropriate, the prosecution of State and local officials \u2026 who issue Federal ballots to individuals not eligible to vote in a Federal election.\u201d And a third provision requires states that want to use mail ballots to give the USPS a list of eligible voters to whom the states intend to send mail ballots, and it bars the USPS from transmitting ballots for voters not on the lists of \u201cenrolled\u201d voters that the USPS will create.<\/p>\n

The 23 states, led by California, and the District of Columbia went to federal court in Boston to challenge the government\u2019s implementation of the order. They contended that it conflicts with provisions in the Constitution that give states the power to determine voter eligibility and to set the \u201cTimes, Places, and Manner\u201d of holding congressional elections.<\/p>\n

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani concluded that the challengers\u2019 claims were not yet \u201cripe\u201d \u2013 that is, ready for review \u2013 for federal elections scheduled to take place after Nov. 3, 2026. But she agreed with the challengers that she could review their claims with regard to the upcoming midterm elections because the executive order \u201ccreated a \u2018direct and immediate dilemma\u2019\u201d for them. Talwani barred the federal government from implementing the provisions outlined above on or before Nov. 3, 2026, in the District of Columbia and the 23 states challenging the provisions.<\/p>\n

The federal government and a group of 12 states, led by Alabama, that had joined the case to defend the order asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit to put Talwani\u2019s order on hold. But the 1st Circuit to do so, noting that neither the federal government nor the 12 states \u201cdefend[ed] the legality of the EO.\u201d The court of appeals also rejected any suggestion that the challengers did not have a right to sue or that the case was not yet ripe. The consequences of the executive order, that court wrote, give states \u201cno practical choice but to respond to the EO now.\u201d<\/p>\n

Both the government and the 12 states came to the Supreme Court last week, asking the justices to pause Talwani\u2019s order. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer that the dispute is not yet ripe because the agencies haven\u2019t yet decided how they will implement the order. But in any event, Sauer wrote, Talwani\u2019s ruling should be put on hold to avoid \u201cserious irreparable harm.\u201d \u201cEven if the agencies\u2019 implementation plans end up being entirely lawful,\u201d Sauer wrote, \u201cthere is not enough time to obtain ordinary appellate relief from the injunction in order to carry them out before the November election, especially given that any such plans will need to be implemented well before November given the timing of election procedures concerning voter-roll verification and mail voting.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read more A court trapped in amber<\/a><\/p>\n

Sauer also asked the justices to issue an immediate administrative stay \u2013 a temporary order that would have blocked Talwani\u2019s order while the court considered the government\u2019s request. The court has not yet done so.<\/p>\n

The 12 states two recent rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit involving the same executive order \u2013 one of which, they said, “held that it is too early to challenge the EO,” and the other of which allowed the executive order to be reinstated “on th[at] same basis.”<\/p>\n

In their filing on Monday, the challengers asked the justices to leave Talwani\u2019s order in place, emphasizing that it was a \u201cnarrow injunction\u201d that merely prohibits the federal government \u201cfrom implementing its new voter-verification and ballot-interception program for this year\u2019s elections with respect to\u201d the 23 states and the District of Columbia.<\/p>\n

The challengers pushed back against the arguments that they lacked a legal right to sue and that the dispute was not ripe for review \u201cbecause the EO has not yet been fully implemented.\u201d \u201c[A]s every member of the panel below agreed,\u201d they wrote, \u201c\u2018the specificity of the EO\u2019s stated timelines and the inescapable legal requirements and impending deadlines that States currently face in facilitating mail-in and absentee balloting for immediately upcoming elections together establish\u2019\u201d the kind of \u201c\u2018concrete injury\u2019\u201d that allow them to sue. Moreover, they added, if they can\u2019t bring a lawsuit to challenge the executive order now, \u201cit would be extremely difficult\u2014if not impossible\u2014to obtain a definitive judicial resolution with enough time remaining for States to redesign and reorder their ballot mail, train elections officials, and adequately educate the public before the November midterms.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read more Trump administration targets birth tourism<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Lawyers for a group of 23 states and the District of Columbia on Monday afternoon urged the Supreme Court to leave in place by a federal court in Boston that barred the federal government from applying provisions of an executive order on mail-in voting to those states in the November elections. In , the challengers […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":49,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-474","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-court-news"],"yoast_head":"\nStates challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation - American Service Review<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation - American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Lawyers for a group of 23 states and the District of Columbia on Monday afternoon urged the Supreme Court to leave in place by a federal court in Boston that barred the federal government from applying provisions of an executive order on mail-in voting to those states in the November elections. In , the challengers […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-08-03T22:07:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"headline\":\"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-03T22:07:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474\"},\"wordCount\":951,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"COURT NEWS\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474\",\"name\":\"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation - American Service Review\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-03T22:07:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":627},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=474#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"American Service Review\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation - American Service Review","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation - American Service Review","og_description":"Lawyers for a group of 23 states and the District of Columbia on Monday afternoon urged the Supreme Court to leave in place by a federal court in Boston that barred the federal government from applying provisions of an executive order on mail-in voting to those states in the November elections. In , the challengers […]","og_url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474","og_site_name":"American Service Review","article_published_time":"2026-08-03T22:07:41+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"headline":"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation","datePublished":"2026-08-03T22:07:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474"},"wordCount":951,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg","articleSection":["COURT NEWS"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474","name":"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation - American Service Review","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-03T22:07:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/c715f0c2af8e59e119587f2d94311fd2.jpg","width":1200,"height":627},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=474#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"States challenging executive order on mail-in voting ask justices to leave in place limits on its implementation"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/","name":"American Service Review","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/americanservicereview.com"],"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/474","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=474"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/474\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/49"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=474"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=474"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=474"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}