The United States Postal Service (USPS) announced on Friday in a "proposed rule" prepared for publication that it is developing plans to sharply tighten mail-in voting by sending ballots only to voters who appear on lists maintained by the federal government. The new regime is expected to be published officially next week.
This move is seen as an alarming step toward the actual implementation of President Donald Trump's broad assault on mail-in voting ahead of the 2026 midterm elections and would signify a significant expansion of federal control over the electoral process without explicit approval from Congress.
Implementing the presidential executive order on mail-in voting
In March, Trump signed a "sweeping executive order" ordering, among other measures, that the Postal Service send mail-in ballots only to voters included on lists compiled and controlled by federal authorities. Currently, this order is the subject of several lawsuits filed by Democrats and voting rights organizations.
The proposed USPS rule comes just a day after a federal judge overseeing one of the cases refused to block the presidential order. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing because federal agencies had not yet taken concrete actions to implement it. Now, that is exactly what appears to be changing.
What the new rule provides
Under the draft, state election administrations will be required at least 30 days before the date on which the legal mailing of ballots begins to provide the USPS with a list of all voters who have requested a mail-in or absentee ballot. If a voter's name does not appear on that list, they will not receive a ballot by mail.
The proposed text allows election officials to also make "supplemental submissions to include new individuals or to correct previous lists until the last day ballots can legally be sent." Thus, the rule itself effectively acknowledges that errors will inevitably arise, which will need to be fixed with supplemental lists and corrections.
Critics note that these exact errors—caused by a new federal program not explicitly approved by Congress—are the type of harms that the plaintiffs in the lawsuits against Trump's order are trying to prevent.
Concerns about voter disenfranchisement
In court filings, Democrats and civil rights groups argue that using USPS lists, as well as other federal registries mentioned in Trump's order, will inevitably lead to eligible citizens being unable to exercise their right to vote. Some of the data is expected to come from Department of Homeland Security (DHS) databases, which have already been shown to contain "serious errors" and inaccuracies.
USPS adds that the names of mail-in voters will be linked to a "unique barcode" assigned to each ballot. According to the service, this barcode will "help determine compliance with federal law and facilitate law enforcement efforts." Critics warn that this could open the door for increased surveillance and potential voter intimidation.
Constitutional disputes regarding the role of federal power
Legal experts and voting rights organizations have argued for months that the plan represents a "blatantly unconstitutional attempt to restrict the right to vote and to usurp the states' authority over elections." The Constitution assigns the organization of elections to the individual states, with only Congress having the power to introduce nationwide standards.
Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General at the Department of Justice, commented on social media that the proposed rule actually brings Trump's order closer to being declared unconstitutional. "One step closer to having standing, which means one step closer to the end of this charade," he wrote, referring to the decision of Judge Carl Nichols.
Judge Nichols' decision and the administration's reaction
Judge Nichols did not entirely reject the possibility that Trump's order might be illegal, but he accepted that the plaintiffs could not yet prove they had suffered actual harm because federal agencies had not yet begun to implement the directives. Paradoxically, his refusal to issue a permanent injunction against the order effectively sounded like an "invitation" for the administration to take action and thereby give the plaintiffs a procedural basis for a new challenge.
"He is not targeting [the plaintiffs], but is only telling the agencies to do something," Nichols, who was appointed to the post by Trump, explained regarding his decision. Thus, the publication of the proposed rule by the USPS may turn out to be the key move that opens the door for a new legal battle with real chances for the order to be overturned.
Next steps and political stakes
The Postal Service has not provided an official response to requests for comment from media and civil rights organizations. Meanwhile, the deadline set in Trump's order by which Postmaster General David Steiner was to begin the procedure for adopting a rule for the formal implementation of restrictions on mail-in voting is expiring.
In recent weeks, Steiner, who is also the CEO of the USPS, has met with senior Trump administration officials and Department of Justice representatives to discuss how to implement the president's plan to build a national federal voter list and tighter control over mail-in ballots.
Thus, the battle over mail-in voting is becoming one of the central lines of political and legal clash ahead of the 2026 elections—a clash between a vision of stricter federal oversight and defenders of the traditional, constitutionally enshrined role of the states as the primary organizers of elections.