一名联邦法官堵塞的唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）总统旨在限制邮寄选票的行政命令中最有争议的方面——即利用邮政服务作为邮件选民资格的主要执行者——现已在2010年后取消了这一决定最高法院的裁决周一表示，法律挑战为时过早。
这一举动意味着，特朗普2026年3月的邮寄选票行政命令的任何方面都不再具有法律效力，政府可以自由向前推进，目前没有任何限制。
特朗普的行政命令指示国土安全部建立一个联邦公民名单，并交给各州；司法部将矛头指向给非公民投票的州政府官员；和USPS指导各州遵守某些邮件选票设计和跟踪要求。
最重要的是，该命令将要求各州向USPS提供一份登记的合格选民名单以供核实，并要求邮政工作人员只向名单上的人递送选票。
几十个民主党人今年4月，州检察长就美国邮政总局的指令起诉特朗普政府，辩称是违宪的因为各州——而不是联邦政府——拥有管理选举的主要权力。
投票权倡导者发起的另一项诉讼质疑了美国邮政提出的选票验证方案。
最高法院周一裁定，各州在现阶段没有资格挑战特朗普的命令，因为没有任何事情正式影响他们将如何管理选举。
然而，保守党多数派明确表示，该决定“并不意味着政府为执行该命令而采取的任何措施都必然是合法的。在这一点上，时间会证明一切。”
邮政服务本周出版了它的完成关于11月选举的计划，主要关注州选票设计和条形码跟踪需求。值得注意的是，它忽略了或者水位下降特朗普的命令所设想的最有争议的方面。
目前，没有要求各国提供详细的USPS的选民资格名单包括公民身份在内的个人身份信息。美国邮政总局还明确表示，它“不会在确定选民资格、维护选民名册或计票方面发挥任何作用”选票。＂
然而，邮政服务将很快着手指导各州确保他们的邮件选举符合某些设计标准（包括条形码）并提供选民地址信息以验证投递。
周三，25个州对邮政服务提出了新的法律挑战，声称这是非法的。
“它取代了根据每个州的宪法权力通过的州法律来管理选举，建立了新的USPS功能和选票邮件限制，这些功能和限制与USPS的管理法规不一致，藐视USPS的程序要求，违反了隐私法，并且不能与联邦投票权法相协调，”他们在马萨诸塞州地方法院提交的诉讼中写道。
Federal judge lifts all blocks on Trump mail-in ballots executive order
A federal judge whoblockedthe most controversial aspect of President Donald Trump＇s executive order aimed at restricting mail-in ballots -- namely， employing the Postal Service as the primary enforcer of mail-voter eligibility -- has now lifted that decision following theSupreme Court＇s rulingMonday that legal challenges are premature．
The move means there are no longer legal holds on any aspect of Trump＇s March 2026 mail-in ballot executive order and that the administration is free to move forward， for now， with its implementation without caveats．
Trump＇s executive order directs the Department of Homeland Security to build a federal citizenship list and give it to the states； the Department of Justice to target state officials who give ballots to noncitizens； and the USPS to direct states to abide by certain mail-ballot design and tracking requirements．
Most critically， the order would require states to provide a list of registered eligible voters to USPS for verification and mandate that postal workers only deliver ballots to persons on the list．
Dozens of Democraticstate attorneys general sued the Trump administration over the USPS directive in April， arguing itis unconstitutionalsince states — not the federal government -- have primary authority for administering elections．
A separate lawsuit by voting rights advocates challenged the proposed USPS ballot verification scheme．
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the states lacked standing to challenge Trump＇s order at this stage since nothing had formally impacted how they will administer elections．
The conservative majority made clear， however， that the decision ＂does not mean that any measure taken by the government to implement the order will necessarily be lawful． On that score， time will tell．＂
The Postal Servicethis weekpublished itsfinalizedplan with respect to the November election，focusing largely on state ballot design and barcode tracking requirements． Notably， it leaves outorwaters downthe most controversial aspects envisioned by Trump＇s order．
At this time， states are not being asked to providedetailedvoter eligibility lists to USPS thatinclude personal identifiable information， including citizenship． The USPS also says outright it ＂will not play any role in determining voter eligibility， maintaining voter rolls， or countingballots．＂
The Postal Service， however， will soon proceed with directing states to ensure their mailballotscomport with certain design standards -- including a barcode -- and to provide voter address information to verify delivery．
Twenty-five states filed a new legal challenge against the Postal Service on Wednesday， alleging it is illegal．
＂It displaces state laws adopted pursuant to each State’s constitutional authority to administer elections， erects new USPS functions and ballot mail constraints that are inconsistent with USPS’s governing statutes， flouts USPS’s procedural requirements， violates the Privacy Act， and cannot be reconciled with federal voting rights law，＂ they wrote in a lawsuit filed in a Massachusetts District Court．
