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.
Posted on 09/10/2026 12:23:52 PM PDT by Red Badger
The Trump administration's effort to implement new United States Postal Service (USPS) requirements for mail-in ballots ahead of the November midterms hit another roadblock Thursday, as a unanimous federal appeals court refused to lift the preliminary injunction blocking mandatory enforcement of the rule while the case is appealed.
On Thursday, a 1st Circuit Court of Appeals panel (consisting of Judges Gustavo Gelpi, Julie Rikelman, and Seth Aframe, all Biden appointees) denied the Trump administration's request to stay Judge Indira Talwani's preliminary injunction, meaning the injunction remains in effect while the appeal proceeds.
To review:
* Trump's election-integrity executive order directed USPS to develop new requirements for ballot mail.
* Plaintiffs initially challenged the policy before USPS issued its final rule.
* Talwani issued a preliminary injunction.
* That was quickly appealed up the chain, and the U.S. Supreme Court stayed that earlier injunction, essentially saying the challenge was premature because courts ordinarily review final agency action (which hadn't yet occurred). Meanwhile, USPS finalized the rule two days before SCOTUS issued its stay.
* Plaintiffs returned to court challenging the actual final rule.
* Talwani issued a new preliminary injunction on September 4, blocking mandatory enforcement for November.
* The administration appealed and asked the 1st Circuit to stay her injunction.
The new rule requires, among other things:
* voter-specific Intelligent Mail barcodes on outgoing and return ballot envelopes;
* matching those barcodes to information uploaded to a USPS database;
* USPS approval of ballot-envelope designs;
* election officials to upload voter-specific information through a USPS portal (which the 1st Circuit points out still isn't operational).
The key point is that ballots that don't satisfy the requirements could be prevented from being delivered to voters.
The Elections Clause gives authority over the manner of congressional elections to the states, subject to alteration by Congress. In its decision, the 1st Circuit says USPS's rule looks very much like an election regulation, not merely a postal regulation
The title of the Final Rule is "Ballot Mail for Federal Elections," and the Final Rule explicitly and exclusively regulates election mail. 91 Fed. Reg. at 54966, 54990-92. It requires action by the States' "chief election official[s]" and its policy justification is "protect[ing] the integrity of federal elections." Id. at 54968-69; see also id. at 54966, 54976 (citing Exec. Order No. 14399, titled "Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," as the source of the policy goals justifying the Final Rule). In short, the Final Rule targets election-related mail in a manner that affects the States' management of elections, and the Final Rule's asserted purpose relates to election integrity. To label this Final Rule as merely a "modest" regulation of the mails is to focus on the trees while ignoring the forest.
The court also points to a congressional-authorization problem, expressing skepticism that Congress delegated this kind of authority through broad postal-management statutes.
The 1st Circuit backs Talwani's findings that implementing this now could create chaos:
* some states couldn't obtain/reprint compliant envelopes in time;
* USPS approval itself could cause delays;
* the portal isn't operating;
* USPS would need to scan and match tens of millions of ballots.
And, importantly, there was no contrary record evidence undermining those findings.
Ultimately, the panel reasons that implementation could result in disenfranchisement of “millions of voters across the country” for “minimal — if any — gains in combating voter fraud.”
To be clear, this ruling does not find the USPS rule unconstitutional. Thursday's order is not a final decision on the constitutionality of the rule. The 1st Circuit was merely deciding whether Talwani's injunction should remain in place while the appeal proceeds. But in order to decide that, the panel assessed the likelihood of success — and it expressly agreed with Talwani that the rule likely regulates elections in a manner constitutionally assigned to states and Congress.
One other note: States may opt to voluntarily comply with the rule, and the USPS may continue preparing the system for post-November elections. Mandatory implementation for November, however, remains blocked.
The administration has already turned to the Supreme Court for emergency relief, with a stay application now pending before the Court. This time, however, the case arrives in a markedly different posture from the one SCOTUS confronted just a few weeks ago: USPS has now issued its final rule, and both the district court and a unanimous 1st Circuit panel have concluded that the challengers are likely to succeed in showing that the rule is unconstitutional.
|
|
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. |
They want to run out the clock
This is exactly the same thing they did after November 4, 2020. Every week they can delay meets their needs.
If we manage to hold on to power after the mid-terms, the Democrats may run short of delay tactics for 2028. The post office, the census, the re-districting, anything else — they can’t keep the controversies going until 2029. The mid-terms are pretty much their last hope.
Translation: “You will not prevent us from cheating no matter how hard you try.”
In this instance, most assuredly.
Longterm, they want to overwhelm us and our institutions.
Here all Biden appointees (i.e. selected by Obama WH leftovers) are demonstrating just how important the elections are.
Everything everyone above states, is true.
It is also true that it was a proper legal decision.
If congress refused to accept the electoral college votes of these states due to lack of fraud coordination they would have received their just rewards.
It’s my understanding that the USPS is carrying out the provisions of the EO on its own, nullifying the need for a court’s “permission”. Was I correctly informed?
I heard that as well, but as to the legal ramifications I have no idea..................
Pull Andrew Jackson and ignore this tyrant
“Pull Andrew Jackson and ignore this tyrant”
____________________________________________________________
From Grok, the favored AI of FR:
“President Andrew Jackson did not actively overturn or issue a physical command against a Supreme Court mandate, but his refusal to enforce the ruling in Worcester v. Georgia (1832) effectively allowed Georgia to continue its illegal seizure of Native American lands.
The Ruling: In Worcester v. Georgia, the Supreme Court—led by Chief Justice John Marshall—ruled that the Cherokee Nation was a distinct, sovereign community and that the state of Georgia had no legal authority to impose its laws or seize land within Cherokee boundaries.
The “Defiance”: The Supreme Court’s mandate was technically directed at the state of Georgia (ordering them to reverse a missionary’s conviction), and the ruling did not contain a formal execution order requiring direct federal intervention. However, President Jackson—who strongly supported Indian treaties and the Removal Act of 1830—refused to step in or force Georgia to comply.
The Famous Quote: Jackson is widely and famously attributed with the quote, “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it,” though historians debate whether he actually said those exact words. Regardless, the quote accurately captures his political stance that the executive branch held equal authority to interpret the Constitution.
The Consequences: Because the federal government declined to back the Supreme Court’s authority, Georgia ignored the ruling. This political impasse cleared the way for the Indian Removal Act to progress unhindered, eventually culminating in the tragic forced march of the Cherokee Nation known as the Trail of Tears later in the decade.”
And just now.....
Eric Daugherty
@EricLDaugh
·
42m
BREAKING: Indiana Supreme Court just OVERTURNED Trump-backed Paula Copenhaver’s 3 vote victory over RINO State Sen. Spencer Deery
They have hereby REINSTATED RINO Deery’s election victory despite a recount THROWING OUT INELIGIBLE VOTES.
What on EARTH?!
Trump challenged Deery after he opposed redistricting. A recount found he actually LOST the election by 3 votes
Final tally, per court order: 6,335 Deery, to 6,332 Copenhaver. Unreal.
I’m beginning to think there is a conspiracy between judges in different courts to rule against anything related to Trump or the GOP. Anything “close” always defaults to a Democratic party win. This has gone way too far.
This is surprising how?
On to SCOTUS!
The USPS figured out the “rules” for local county elections departments and published them, but indicated that they are “suspended” for 2026 pending the outcome of legal challenges:
From the USPS:
“To ensure the faithful execution of federal law in connection with federal elections, this rule has an immediate effective date. Delaying the effective date would jeopardize implementation of this rule in time for the 2026 general election, which will be held on November 3, 2026. Given injunctions currently in place in State of California v. Trump, No. 26-cv-11581 (D. Mass. June 25, 2026), and League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, No. 26-cv-11549 (D. Mass. Aug. 11, 2026), the Postal Service will not take actions to implement the rule specifically for the 2026 election unless and until the government obtains relief from those injunctions.”
The new full USPS rules (not in effect yet):
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/08/26/2026-17238/ballot-mail-for-federal-elections
At this point we need to start doing what the democrats did when they let in the million of illegals under Biden. We need to do what needs to be done and then deal with the consequences later. Just announce only citizens can vote and stop illegals from voting. We need to start rounding up illegals in the thousands and shipping them home, to hell with the courts. Overwhelm the system. I really don’t care what the courts say anymore.
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.