President Trump’s administration asked the Supreme Court on July 27 to allow enforcement of an executive order restricting mail-in voting, escalating a legal fight over voting access just 99 days before the November midterm elections.
The emergency appeal came after a federal appeals court in Boston upheld a lower court’s block on the order in 23 Democratic-led states and Washington, D.C. on July 26. A three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision that the order would impose “unprecedented levels of involvement by federal officials in how states administer elections” and risk voter disenfranchisement, according to CNBC.
Trump signed the order, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” on March 31. It directs the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration to compile federal citizenship lists for each state, which states would then use to create lists of eligible mail voters. The order then instructs the U.S. Postal Service to refuse delivery of ballots from voters not on those lists, according to the White House document.
The Department of Justice argued that the challenge was premature because agencies had not finalized the policies needed to carry out Trump’s order. But the appeals court majority said states were already being forced to prepare for changes that could affect the midterm elections, according to CNBC. The court noted the order would require the USPS to make substantial changes to mail-handling processes on the threshold of the November election.
The order’s approach raised concerns from voting rights advocates and election officials. The Brennan Center for Justice warned that the federal government’s citizenship data is incomplete and sometimes inaccurate, meaning eligible American citizens could be left off the lists and potentially disenfranchised. The center also flagged that the order threatens criminal penalties for election officials and mail carriers who send ballots to individuals the administration deems ineligible.
On July 29, a dozen Republican-led states joined the Trump administration’s Supreme Court appeal. Missouri led the coalition of states that included Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas, according to Democracy Docket. The GOP states argued the injunction was “premature” because federal agencies had not yet fully implemented the order.
The Constitution vests election authority in the states, with Congress holding supervisory power. A federal judge in Massachusetts who initially blocked the order found that it would “sow confusion” and “threaten disenfranchisement of many eligible voters,” according to the Washington Post. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the circuit justice assigned to the case, set an August 3 deadline for the 23 states challenging the order to file their response, according to Democracy Docket.
The Supreme Court has previously ruled against the Trump administration on mail voting. In June 2026, the Court allowed mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day to be counted in federal elections, rejecting arguments for stricter deadlines.
Sources
- CNBC — Trump’s emergency request to the Supreme Court and details on the appeals court ruling keeping restrictions blocked in 23 states
- The Washington Post — The appeals court finding and Trump administration’s Supreme Court appeal
- White House — Full text of Executive Order 14399 and its provisions on citizenship lists and USPS mail-in ballot procedures
- Brennan Center for Justice — Analysis of the executive order’s flawed citizenship lists and criminal liability provisions for election officials
- Democracy Docket — GOP states’ emergency appeal filed July 29 and Justice Jackson’s August 3 deadline for response
- Reuters — Appeals court ruling blocking Trump’s mail-in voting order implementation
