Posted on 09/05/2026 3:59:55 AM PDT by Red Badger
The federal judge handling the legal battle over new U.S. Postal Service mail ballot rules extended her block of the rules for the November midterm elections in an order issued on Friday, again finding them likely unlawful.
Judge Indira Talwani's temporary order, which had been set to expire on Sept. 10, is now in place indefinitely unless a higher court allows the Trump administration to put the rules into effect.
The judge found that immediate implementation of the rules this close to the November election, prompted by President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at tightening access to mail ballots, "threatens disenfranchisement of millions of United States citizens who seek to vote by mail."
Talwani concluded that the rules, which mandate nationwide mail ballot design and review requirements and state submission of a voter information database to USPS, are "unconstitutional where it intrudes not only on Congress's Elections Clause powers but also that power left to the States."
The decision ups the ante for the U.S. Supreme Court, which had already been asked to weigh in on Talwani's preliminary injunction. A decision is expected as soon as next week.
Time is of the essence since some states have already begun mailing ballots for the fall election.
Trump, who has pushed unfounded claims of widespread mail ballot fraud, wants states to report to USPS basic voter information, such as a voter's name and home address, attached to a unique barcode on every mail-in ballot distributed. Postal workers would then only deliver ballots addressed to voters who appear on the state-provided list.
Following the publication of the regulations last month, dozens of Democratic state attorneys general sued the Trump administration after an earlier lawsuit was blocked by the Supreme Court, which said at the time that the challenge was premature since the regulations hadn't been finalized.
Judge Talwani wrote in her opinion Friday that the dispute was now ripe for judicial intervention. "Nothing is hypothetical," she said of the alleged harm to states, voters and voter advocacy groups ahead of the November election.
In its latest appeal to the justices, the Trump administration insisted the rules impose only "modest" ballot design and review requirements on states and that a requirement to submit name, address, and barcode information of intended recipients is not onerous or intrusive.
The states challenging the USPS rule have until Tuesday, Sept. 8, at 10 a.m. to formally respond before the Supreme Court makes a decision.
The states and voter advocacy groups have argued that the new USPS regulations are an attempt by the Trump administration to federalize elections, which are historically and constitutionally managed by each state, and make it harder to vote by mail for everyday citizens.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
And why is it so close to the election?
Because of you 🤬
It’s all delay tactics...............
Only the Supreme Court can block for the whole country. A federal judge can only do their district.
Article doesn’t reveal who appointed this judge. Trump’s executive order is meant to ensure legitimate elections. Period. Why would anyone fight this? The question is rhetorical of course.
Trump, who has pushed unfounded claims of widespread mail ballot fraud,…
💩
This is not one of Trump’s best decisions. Doesn’t he know that the USPS was 100% opposed to him in past elections? They are NOT going to help him, no matter what he wants.
The fact that a Federal entity blatantly and vigorously supports one party over another is troublesome overall.
IIRC, She’s an Obamanation............
2014 Obama judge
“unfounded”
Go away, Trump hater.
Can the SCOTUS ride around with every mailman to be sure he delivers to, or picks up from, ballots to homes in obviously right-leaning enclaves, or homes with those signs in their yards?
The whole thing is ridiculous.
“… Judge Indira Talwani’s …”
Well, there’s yer problem, right there.
“Article doesn’t reveal who appointed this judge.”
The judge was educated at Radcliffe and the University of California at Berkeley Law School. She practiced law in San Francisco and Boston. She was nominated for the federal court by President Obama and was confirmed by the Senate on May 8, 2014 by a vote of 94 to 0. Of the 6 Senators not voting 2 were Republicans and 4 were Democrats.
I appears the Republicans in the Senate were either overwhelmingly impressed with the nominee’s qualifications or simply rolled over.
“2014 Obama judge”
The nomination was approved by a 94 to 0 roll call vote of the Senate. Apparently all Republican Senators thought she was extremely qualified. University of California at Berkeley Law School grad. Practiced law in San Francisco and Boston.
Here’s a link to the Senate vote: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1132/vote_113_2_00137.htm?congress=113&session=2&vote=00137
“The judge found that immediate implementation of the rules threatens disenfranchisement of millions of United States citizens who seek to vote by mail.”
No, just the dead and fictitious ones.
CC
Millions of unmarked ballots will suddenly get lost in the mails.
All this is for is to get millions of ballots out there to get lost, stolen and redirected to Democrat operatives to have them marked for their candidates. Nothing more, nothing less.............
The USPS is a party to the case. This it would apply to them.
CNN has convinced my 92-year-old father Trump's proposed regulations will not allow him to vote by mail, even though he is a US citizen and legally registered.
Obstructionist Judge Indira Talwani on the take from the democrats?.
Obama appointee.........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.