Trump Is About to Get the Mail-Ballot Chaos He’s Been Looking For

Legal Challenges Persist Over Executive Order on Mail Ballot Procedures Ahead of 2026 Midterms

The midterms are two months away, and an executive order directing the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Homeland Security to apply new processing requirements for mail ballots has produced a series of court rulings. The order led to litigation that reached the Supreme Court last week. The justices permitted the order to take effect temporarily without addressing its underlying legal merits, which left room for further challenges. Updated lawsuits followed within days, and U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani issued a 14-day restraining order blocking implementation. States now face decisions on whether to adjust mail-ballot operations to meet the federal requirements or maintain existing procedures while litigation continues.

States and voting rights organizations remain in court proceedings seeking to prevent the order from taking effect. Judge Talwani stated that the regulation appears likely unconstitutional and that compliance would be practically impossible for the 2026 midterm elections, which are little more than two months away. The temporary restraining order provides two weeks of relief, after which additional court action is expected.

The Constitution assigns states primary authority over the times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives, subject to congressional override. This framework was reinforced by the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. The executive order seeks to impose uniform federal requirements on mail-ballot handling through the Postal Service and Homeland Security. The administration has cited the need for standardized tracking and eligibility verification in public statements about the order.

A whistleblower report released this week described internal Postal Service planning for a system that would review batches of mail ballots for errors and potentially withhold delivery of large groups of ballots upon detection of a single unconfirmed discrepancy. The system is not yet active, but several states scheduled to begin mailing ballots this week are operating under uncertainty about final procedures.

The executive order establishes three specific requirements for mail voting. First, ballot envelopes must carry an intelligent mail barcode and an “Official Election Mail” logo for Postal Service processing. Second, states must notify the Postal Service of their intent to use the new envelopes at least 90 days before an election. Third, state election officials must provide the Postal Service with a list of every resident to whom a mail ballot will be sent. The order does not explicitly define how the lists will be cross-checked, but it references alignment with a separate list of eligible citizens compiled by the Department of Homeland Security. The Postal Service may decline to deliver ballots for names absent from both lists.

States required to implement these changes would incur costs for redesigning envelopes, reprinting materials, and updating public information. Election officials would also need to prepare and transmit voter lists in a new format. Liz Avore, senior adviser at the Voting Rights Lab, stated that the requirements reduce the time election offices have to conduct core election functions.

To illustrate the practical effects, states can be grouped by their current mail-ballot practices.

States that conduct elections entirely or almost entirely by mail

California, Colorado, Hawaiʻi, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia fall into this category. In the 2024 general election, approximately 81 percent of eligible voters in California cast ballots by mail. Colorado sends ballots to all registered voters by mail. These jurisdictions rely heavily on the Postal Service for ballot delivery and would face elevated reprinting and redesign expenses proportional to their volume. Avore noted that these states already maintain detailed records distinguishing mail voters from others, which could simplify the required list submission compared with states that have mixed voting methods.

States that have already printed mail ballots

North Carolina, Massachusetts, and Washington have begun or completed printing for the November election. North Carolina started mailing ballots on the Friday before the latest court order. Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell stated that multiple states have scheduled ballot mailings and that compliance with the federal requirements would be virtually impossible if the order takes effect. Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs indicated that counties would need to destroy and replace more than 5 million printed envelopes if new designs are mandated.

States with decentralized election administration

Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Minnesota administer elections at the municipal level rather than through county offices. This structure distributes responsibility across many local officials, some of whom operate with limited staff. Avore observed that small jurisdictions may encounter difficulty navigating the Postal Service portal and compiling the required lists within short time frames.

The executive order has generated litigation in multiple forums. The Supreme Court’s temporary stay was followed by the district court’s restraining order within days. Further proceedings are anticipated before the November election. No states have adopted proof-of-citizenship requirements for voter registration or eliminated no-excuse mail voting during the current presidential term, according to Avore. She described existing state election systems as resilient in the face of policy disputes.

The litigation continues to determine whether the federal requirements will apply to the 2026 midterms. States are monitoring court developments while preparing ballots under existing state procedures.