Supreme Court rejects Trump’s plan to restrict mail-in voting ahead of the midterm elections

A majority of the United States Supreme Court on Monday blocked President Donald Trump’s administration from changing the way mail-in ballots are delivered, dealing it a major blow ahead of the midterm elections.

The regulation would have given the United States Postal Service (USPS) new powers to halt or refuse the delivery of millions of ballots. Election officials and voting rights organizations warned that its implementation could cause chaos and lead to the mass disenfranchisement of voters.

In a brief order, the court said the administration was “unlikely to succeed on the merits of the lawsuit,” without providing further arguments. Conservative justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas voted against the decision.

The Trump administration had defended the change as an effort to strengthen the security of mail-in voting and prevent election fraud. Opponents, meanwhile, described the initiative as an overreach of the president’s authority and interference in the electoral process.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in a separate opinion, noted that even if the USPS had the authority to implement the rule, state and local election officials would not have enough time to put it into effect before the elections.

A group of Democratic-led states, voting rights organizations and election administrators argued that implementing the changes would require the creation of new technology systems, modifications to ballot envelopes and the adoption of new procedures. In some states, ballot distribution had already begun.

The United States Constitution stipulates that election rules are established by the states and Congress, not by the White House or the Postal Service.

The decision represents a significant political setback for President Trump, who for years has claimed that mail-in voting is accompanied by widespread fraud. Courts and election experts, however, have emphasized that such cases are extremely rare and that there is no evidence of large-scale manipulation.