Trump Seeks Supreme Court Review of Mail-In Voting Order

President Donald Trump’s administration is moving to restrict mail-in voting nationwide ahead of the midterms, deploying additional armed security at postal facilities and asking the Supreme Court to lift a judicial block on an executive order that limits who can receive absentee ballots.

Internal USPS documents show the agency plans to station more contracted armed officers at 18 mail facilities starting this month, approving over 12,000 hours of weekly security work across those sites. The added costs come as the Postal Service reports $2 billion in losses for the most recent quarter. Scholars and union officials describe the buildup as an unusual step that could give the White House greater influence over ballot handling.

Notre Dame professor James O’Rourke, who studies the postal service, warned that the effort echoes private security arrangements used by immigration enforcement agencies and raises questions about federal involvement in state-run elections. “Screening mail ballots for eligibility would amount to an unprecedented, potentially unconstitutional, involvement of the federal government in the administration of elections,” he said.

The administration’s push comes after the Supreme Court ruled last month that states may count ballots postmarked by Election Day even if they arrive later. Trump responded by directing the Justice Department to seek emergency relief from the high court to enforce his March executive order. That order instructed the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration to create lists of eligible voters and barred the Postal Service from mailing ballots to anyone not already on a state’s approved absentee list.

Democratic officials in 23 states and the District of Columbia sued, arguing the order exceeds presidential authority. A federal judge in Massachusetts appointed by former President Obama blocked key provisions for those jurisdictions. An appeals court panel upheld the pause, though one Trump-appointed judge dissented in part. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the Supreme Court that lower courts acted prematurely because the agencies have not yet finalized rules to carry out the order.

Critics see the combined actions as part of a broader campaign to shrink access to mail voting and centralize control over election processes. The Postal Service’s expanded security contracts, in particular, have drawn comparisons to efforts that could allow federal screening of ballots without clear statutory backing.

Meanwhile, Trump’s parallel pressure on Senate Republicans to advance the SAVE Act has met resistance. The bill would impose stricter voter ID and citizenship verification requirements. Majority Leader John Thune has acknowledged the lack of votes to end the filibuster or attach the measure to must-pass legislation, and several GOP senators have said the effort is unlikely to succeed before the August recess.

Postal workers’ representatives have expressed concern that the new security presence could slow operations and create confusion at facilities already under financial strain. The agency has not detailed how the guards will interact with ballot mail, but the timing of the deployments has fueled suspicion among opponents of the administration’s election agenda.

Legal experts note that any Supreme Court decision to allow the executive order to proceed could set a precedent for greater federal oversight of state election administration. With the midterms approaching, the dispute is expected to intensify as states prepare their voting procedures.