National Democrats Call for Federal Judge to Block Trump's Election Restrictions
-
National Democrats on Tuesday cited the rule in asking the federal judge in the Washington case to block Trump’s order after he declined to do so last spring, saying the administration at the time had not taken concrete action. In Boston, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani also found that the administration moving forward with the mail ballot rule had violated a separate injunction she had placed on the Postal Service prohibiting it from enacting Trump’s order, although she did not take any action against the government.
Compare 15 other versions
ABC NewsU.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani issued a temporary order preventing the United States Postal Service from increasing its oversight of mail-in voting, following an executive order from President Donald Trump that would effectively employ the Postal Service as the primary enforcer of mail-voter eligibility.
Washington ExaminerObama-appointed U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued the order blocking parts of the U.S. Postal Service’s newly implemented rule to enact new measures on mail-in voting that Democratic plaintiffs say exceed executive authority while restricting mail-in voting. Talwani wrote that the temporary restraining order will be in place for 14 days, temporarily preventing the rules from going into effect for two weeks for all Nov. 3, 2026, elections just ahead of the general midterm election season.
The Guardian USThe president’s directive stalled for a second time about a week before the first mail ballots are due to be sent out for the rapidly approaching midterm elections. In the US district court, Judge Indira Talwani placed a 14-day hold on the government implementing the order in a case that could be headed back to the supreme court, which on Monday overturned an earlier ruling of hers that had blocked Trump’s order from taking effect.
Democracy NowThe Supreme Court on Monday lifted a lower court’s injunction on President Trump’s executive order seeking to limit mail-in voting ahead of November’s midterm elections. Trump’s order directs the Department of Homeland Security to create state-by-state lists of eligible voters who are citizens. The U.S. Postal Service would then use the lists provided by states to assess whether voters should be allowed to vote by mail. Justices ruled 6 to 3 that California and 22 other states lacked standing to sue over the issue. The ruling, however, did not address whether Trump had authority to impose the rules. A separate nationwide injunction against parts of the same order remains in place.
USA TodayU.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston issued a temporary restraining order at the behest of Democratic-led states and voting rights groups after the U.S. Supreme Court on Aug. 24 issued a ruling that led to the lifting of earlier injunctions blocking Trump's plans to restrict mail-in voting.
Washington TimesA federal judge issued a restraining order Thursday night forbidding the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out President Trump’s plans to police which mailed ballots can be delivered for November’s election, saying the agency overstepped its boundaries.
Fox NewsA federal judge on Thursday again blocked President Donald Trump's executive order limiting mail-in voting, halting the directive, at least for now, for a second time with only about a week before the first mail ballots are expected to be sent out for the upcoming midterm elections.
The HillFederal judge again issues temporarily block on mail-in voting restrictions A federal judge in Boston has again blocked the Trump administration from moving forward with new mail-in voting restrictions ahead of the November midterms. Judge Indira Talwani ruled Thursday night that a group of blue states and private voting rights groups were likely to succeed in their claims that the U.S. Postal Service rule is…
Associated PressThe move stalled the directive for a second time only about a week before the first mail ballots are due to be sent out for the rapidly approaching midterm elections. U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani blocked the government from implementing the order for two weeks.
NBC NewsA federal judge Thursday blocked a Postal Service regulation that would exert control over mail-in ballots ahead of the midterm elections in the latest setback on the issue for President Donald Trump.
NPR NewsA federal judge in Boston has handed the Trump administration another temporary win in the legal fight over the president's executive order to restrict mail-in voting for the midterm election.
New York TimesJudge Once Again Bars Postal Service From Restricting Mail-In Vote After reviewing the agency’s final plan to comply with President Trump’s demands, a federal judge barred the Postal Service from imposing new restrictions on mail-in voting.
Washington PostJudge lifts block on Trump changes to mail voting, though legal fights continue The president’s executive order is now in effect for the midterm elections, but the ruling leaves the door open to renewed challenges from rights groups.
ReutersJudge blocks rule implementing Trump plan to restrict mail-in voting - Reuters Judge blocks rule implementing Trump plan to restrict mail-in voting Reuters
PBS NewsHourNews Wrap: States sue USPS, challenging Trump's order on mail-in voting In our news wrap Wednesday, Democratic-controlled states filed a new lawsuit against the U.S. Postal Service, challenging President Trump's executive order on mail-in voting, Iran says it would bar all military vessels from passing through the Strait of Hormuz as part of a potential agreement with Oman to reopen the waterway and the FDA approved a landmark new drug today for pancreatic cancer.
-
They argue the new federal restrictions risk disenfranchising voters and would unduly burden states in the weeks running up to the election, forcing them to buy new envelopes and equipment, establish new systems and train staff.
Compare 1 other version
Washington TimesShe said absent the restraining order, states would have been forced to redesign their ballot mail envelopes, reorder those supplies, train election officials to comply with the new federal mandate and provide voter lists to the postal service, all before the election.
-
Democrats and voting rights groups contend the demand is unconstitutional. The Constitution, they note, grants states and, in some cases, Congress the power to make election rules — not the president or Postal Service.
Compare 3 other versions
The Guardian USDemocrats and voting rights groups contend the demand is unconstitutional. The constitution, they note, grants states and, in some cases, Congress the power to make election rules – not the president or postal service.
Fox NewsA hearing in the case is scheduled for Sept. 3. Democrats and voting rights groups argue that the Postal Service rule and Trump’s order are unconstitutional. They say the Constitution grants states, as well as Congress in some cases, the authority to establish election rules, noting that the president and Postal Service do not have that power. USPS, however, says the rule does not determine voter eligibility or compare submissions with state voter rolls, and that states retain control over who may vote by mail.
USA TodayThe plaintiffs argue the Postal Service lacks authority to issue the rule and, by issuing it, usurped the authority states and Congress were given under the U.S. Constitution to regulate elections. They contend the rule also undermines the Postal Service's role as a neutral mail carrier and violates federal laws protecting voters' rights. (Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Thomas Derpinghaus)
-
The ruling is likely to be quickly appealed and could soon make its way back to the Supreme Court, days after the nation's highest court handed down a procedural decision that allowed the administration to move forward.
Compare 2 other versions
Associated PressThe case could soon be appealed back to the Supreme Court, days after the justices handed down a procedural decision that allowed the the administration to move ahead.
NBC NewsThe Trump administration could now seek to quickly overturn her decision by rushing to the Supreme Court.
-
"Plaintiff states have neither time nor funds to design new mail ballots, seek approval of the new designs, order production of mail ballots, update their own election management systems, train election officials to use the USPS portal and upload citizen data to the portal, all before the midterms," Talwani wrote in Thursday's ruling.
Compare 2 other versions
Associated Press“Plaintiff states have neither time nor funds to design new mail ballots, seek approval of the new designs, order production of mail ballots, update their own election management systems, train election officials to use the USPS portal and upload citizen data to the portal, all before the midterms,” Talwani wrote Thursday.
The Guardian USTalwani wrote in her ruling: “Plaintiff states have neither time nor funds to design new mail ballots, seek approval of the new designs, order production of mail ballots, update their own election management systems, train election officials to use the USPS portal and upload citizen data to the portal, all before the midterms.”
-
"This rule is a clear attempt by the federal government to interfere in elections it has no power to control. Today, a federal court halted it before this administration could wreak havoc on our elections," New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of two dozen Democrat attorneys general who filed one of the lawsuits, said in a statement.
Compare 1 other version
HuffPost“Across the country, states are already deep into preparations for the 2026 elections. Now, at the last moment, the federal government is attempting to meddle in those preparations and potentially threaten countless Americans’ right to vote,” New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of 25 Democratic attorneys general filing the lawsuit, said in a statement. “USPS has no authority to decide who can and cannot vote by mail.”
-
The president has long targeted mail voting, which he falsely blames for his 2020 election loss even though he himself uses it to cast his ballot.
Compare 4 other versions
Fox NewsAccording to a 2025 report by the Brookings Institution, mail-in voting fraud was recorded in only about four cases out of every 10 million mail ballots cast, contradicting claims by Trump and his allies that election fraud is widespread. The analysis covered general elections from 2016 through 2022 and relied in part on a database that its source says is not comprehensive.
NBC NewsTrump often criticizes mail-in ballots, claiming without evidence there is rampant fraud even though they are widely used by Republicans and Democrats all across the country.
The Guardian USThe president has long targeted mail voting – even though he uses it himself – and falsely blames the system for his 2020 election loss.
HuffPostTrump has long targeted mail voting, which he falsely blames for his 2020 election loss and is disproportionately used by Democrats as a result of Trump’s condemnations. Since returning to power, Trump has tried to claim authority over election rules, saying he thinks Republicans should “take over” vote counting in Democratic areas.
-
County Circuit Court Judge Robert Thompson ruled that Democrats had violated state deadlines for adding ballot measures. Earlier this year, Maryland Democrats passed a law requiring the Maryland secretary of state to certify ballot summaries by July 1, but the amendment was submitted after that date.
Compare 1 other version
The FederalistAnne Arundel County Circuit Court Judge Robert J. Thompson on Wednesday enjoined the Maryland State Board of Elections from putting an amendment question on the Nov. 3 ballot that the legislature unlawfully conceived.
-
The federal judge argued that voters face a “significant risk of disenfranchisement” if they cannot comply with the new rule’s guidelines before Election Day, basing her temporary order on the likelihood of success on the merits and what she determined was the “grave” risk of irreparable harm to U.S. voters.
Compare 1 other version
Washington Times“In light of the state election officials’ unrebutted declarations that compliance with the final rule at this late date is impossible, the risk of irreparable harm to voters in those jurisdictions is grave,” she said.
-
“In any event, the USPS’s interest in correcting an unsubstantiated problem through likely unconstitutional means is dwarfed by the overwhelming risk of pervasive disenfranchisement of citizens who need access to mail ballots in order to vote,” she wrote.
Compare 1 other version
Washington Examiner“The USPS’s interest in correcting an unsubstantiated problem through likely unconstitutional means is dwarfed by the overwhelming risk of pervasive disenfranchisement of citizens who need access to mail ballots in order to vote. The balance of harms and public interest warrants a TRO,” Talwani wrote.
12 details only one outlet reported
Independent claims that didn't surface elsewhere in our corpus. Treat as supplementary — not corroborated across outlets.
-
01 NPR News The decision sets up another possible consideration of the executive order by the Supreme Court. The court ruled on a procedural issue, but has not weighed in on whether Trump's order is legal.
-
02 USA Today That decision led to a frantic effort by dozens of Democratic state attorneys general and voting rights groups, including the League of Women Voters, to renew their legal fight and secure an order that would prevent the USPS from enforcing a rule that was allowed to take effect on Aug. 26.
-
03 Fox News The order attempted to change election procedures, including by requiring additional physical documentation to register to vote, such as a U.S. passport, a REAL ID or military ID indicating U.S. citizenship or a government-issued photo ID accompanied by proof of citizenship.
-
04 Associated Press The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Monday struck down one of those holds.
-
05 The Guardian US The supreme court’s conservative majority on Monday struck down one of those holds, finding it was premature.
-
06 ABC News The move means there are no longer legal holds on any aspect of Trump's March 2026 mail-in ballot executive order and that the administration is free to move forward with its implementation without caveats. This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
-
07 NBC News Talwani wrote that the regulation is likely unlawful because the president cannot insert the federal government into elections without the express authorization of Congress.
-
08 Washington Times She rejected the government’s justification that the new rules are needed to prevent fraud in mail-in voting, saying the case record “continues to lack any evidence” of fraud.
-
09 HuffPost Additional court rulings, like one filed Wednesday by Democratic state officials, could still stop the directive from taking effect before the rapidly approaching midterm elections.
-
10 PBS NewsHour WATCH: Trump calls Supreme Court ruling on mail ballots 'great' for Republican Party PBS News White House correspondent Liz Landers asked the president about what the ruling means for states like North Carolina, where mail-in ballots are due to be sent out next week.
-
11 The Federalist Democrats have done a lot of weaselly things in the pursuit of power, but their ploy to grab a congressional seat by a quick and crooked change to Maryland’s constitution is a real doozy.
-
12 Democracy Now November.” “If voting proceeds based on these DHS lists,” adds Berman, “it’s going to be inaccurate, it’s going to be unconstitutional, and a lot of legitimate American voters are going to be wrongly labeled as noncitizens and unable to vote — either based on shoddy data or an intentional attempt by the Trump administration to prevent people from voting.” Please check back later for full transcript.
Fact Corroboration
Which sources independently confirm the same facts. Hover a claim to see its sources, or a source to see what it corroborates.
Coverage by Perspective
Source Similarity
Connections show how similarly each outlet covered this story. Thicker lines = more similar framing.
Sources (17)
- huffpost
- pbs
- abc
- nyt
- ap
- foxnews
- federalist
- npr
- thehill
- wapo
- democracynow
- usatoday
- nbc
- guardian
- washexaminer
- washtimes
- reuters