“Ballots have already begun to be mailed in North Carolina, and more States will begin the mailing process as the injunction remains in place — including Alabama on September 9 and at least five States the week of September 13,” Solicitor General John Sauer wrote.

“Once those ballot envelopes enter the mailstream, there is no retrieving them,” Sauer said. “And while the injunction allows the Postal Service and the States to continue taking steps to ensure that their envelopes satisfy the Rule’s requirements … each day the injunction is in place risks sowing confusion and chaos because the injunction makes those preparatory steps voluntary, rather than mandatory.”

The Supreme Court previously sided with the Trump administration, allowing the USPS ballot rule to proceed without ruling on its legality.

The USPS ballot rule issued last month stems from President Donald Trump’s March 31 executive order directing the federal agency to deliver mail ballots to U.S. citizens vetted by the administration.

The rule would require mail-in ballots to be stamped with official Election Mail markings and to be sent inside automation-compatible envelopes with unique Intelligent Mail barcodes. Election officials would submit voters’ names, addresses, and corresponding barcode information through a portal operated by the federal government. The policy is intended to help USPS track mail-in ballots more closely and to ensure ballots are sent only to eligible voters.

Sauer’s filing maintains the rule does not prevent states from administering their elections and that USPS “will not play any role in determining voter eligibility, maintaining voter rolls, or counting ballots.”

The rule marks Trump’s latest effort to restrict mail-in voting and preserve election integrity.

JUDGE EXTENDS BLOCK RESTRICTING USPS MAIL-IN BALLOT RULE

The administration is asking the Supreme Court to grant a stay that would override Talwani’s preliminary injunction pending its appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. That way, the rule can be in effect for the 2026 elections through Nov. 3.

“Simply put, the best way to address respondents’ fears about inability to comply with the Rule is to grant an immediate administrative stay of the order, followed by a full stay pending further review,” Sauer said. “That will remove the improper cloud of uncertainty that the district court has cast over the Rule, making clear to all involved that compliance with the Rule is not optional and must start without further delay.”