United States

US Supreme Court blocks Trump’s crackdown on postal voting

The court ruling blocks an executive order seeking to restrict postal voting, which would have a significant impact on the electoral process

 Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti a Washington, D.C., Stati Uniti, 1° settembre 2026. REUTERS/Aaron Schwartz/Foto d'archivio REUTERS

2' min read

Translated by AI
Versione italiana

2' min read

Translated by AI
Versione italiana

The US Supreme Court has blocked the new restrictions on postal voting proposed by the Trump administration, in a legal battle that is rapidly approaching the mid-term elections on 3 November. District Judge Carl J. Nichols, appointed by Donald Trump during his first term, ruled that the President’s plan ‘likely exceeds the authority granted to the Postal Service by Congress’.

What does Trump’s plan involve?

The executive order issued by the White House – and now suspended by the Supreme Court – requires states to upload their electoral registers to a portal currently being developed by the Post Office. The issue is that, according to a complaint lodged by a federal whistleblower, the system could prevent many voters from receiving their ballot papers.

Loading...

The Post Office is said to have adopted a ‘zero-per-cent-error’ policy, under which an entire batch of forms could be rejected if even a single barcode checked by an employee did not match the information on the portal. A single batch could contain tens of thousands of forms.

“The Post Office has devised a system to deprive millions of Americans of their right to vote,” said Richard Blumenthal, the Democratic senator for Connecticut, who made the whistleblower’s allegations public. A spokesperson for the Post Office, however, maintained that the system would function correctly. “Americans can be confident that postal votes will be handled securely and delivered reliably,” the spokesperson said.

Why Trump wants to restrict postal voting

The President’s legal battle began months ago. In August, the Supreme Court issued an initial ruling giving the green light to the administration’s directive, whilst today it has been halted. This legal battle highlights the urgency with which Trump is seeking to implement the executive order ahead of the November elections. Traditionally, in fact, Democratic voters have made greater use of postal voting, so restricting this option could benefit the Republican Party.

In some states, including Wisconsin, North Carolina and Alabama, the distribution of postal ballot papers has already begun, and in some cases voters have already returned theirs. Several lower courts, however, have ruled in favour of around twenty states and voter rights groups, holding that the Trump administration does not have the power to regulate the conduct of state elections.

Against this backdrop, one hundred electoral officials from across the country have submitted a document to the Supreme Court arguing that the plan could cause serious disruption and that it is now too late to implement it in time for the November elections, whilst a dozen Republican-led states have instead called for it to be allowed to go ahead, arguing that the changes would strengthen confidence in the electoral process and describing them as ‘common-sense’ measures.

Trump is seeking, in various ways, to increase federal control over electoral procedures. The administration has already asked the Supreme Court to allow states to verify voters’ citizenship. Furthermore, the White House is putting pressure on the Senate to pass the Save America Act, which would require voters to prove their citizenship when registering to vote and to present a photo ID when casting their vote.

Copyright reserved ©
Loading...

Brand connect

Loading...

Newsletter

Notizie e approfondimenti sugli avvenimenti politici, economici e finanziari.

Iscriviti