Supreme Court Keeps USPS Mail-Ballot Rules Blocked: Why Federal Employees Should Still Vote Early

The Supreme Court's decision on the Postal Service's mail-ballot rules is good news for anyone planning to vote by mail this fall, but the headlines leave out the part that matters most. Last night the Court refused to lift the lower-court orders blocking the new rules, finding that the government is "unlikely to succeed on the merits." Justices Alito and Thomas dissented. That is a win. It is also, as Shaun Southworth put it, a reprieve rather than a resolution, and there are four reasons federal employees and everyone else should read the fine print.

How the Mail-Ballot Rules Got to the Supreme Court

In March, the President ordered the Postal Service to write new rules for mail ballots. Under those rules, states would have had to upload their mail-voter lists to a federal portal and use a special barcoded envelope. If a state did not comply, the Postal Service would not deliver its ballots.

Two federal judges blocked the rules, one of them a Trump appointee. The administration then went to the Supreme Court, and last night the Court declined to lift the block. This was the administration's third trip to the Supreme Court over election administration in a matter of weeks, with the midterms seven weeks away and ballots already in the mail in North Carolina, Alabama, and other states.

The Constitutional Problem in One Sentence

Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution assigns the times, places, and manner of federal elections to the states and to Congress. The President is not in that sentence. So far, that argument is winning in court.

Four Reasons the Fight Is Not Over

1. A Reprieve, Not a Resolution

Justice Kavanaugh wrote separately that there is "at least a fair prospect" that the rule falls within the Postal Service's authority. The concern is timing, not necessarily power. That reads like a roadmap for a future election, even if it does not apply to this one.

2. A Whistleblower's Allegations About the Ballot Portal

A whistleblower inside the Postal Service told Congress that the ballot portal was started only three and a half months before launch, skipped standard testing, and uses a sampling standard under which one bad barcode can bounce an entire batch of ballots back to the election office. These are allegations, not findings, but they are serious ones.

3. The Voter-Roll Request Is Still Pending

The administration is separately asking the Supreme Court to allow the Department of Homeland Security to check state voter rolls against Social Security data. It says it has flagged more than 28,000 potential noncitizens. Some of those flagged in Utah and Texas turned out to be citizens, and the Social Security Administration has said its records are not a definitive list of citizens. The Court asked for a response by today.

4. Election Officials From Both Parties Are Worried

Election officials from both parties, including Republican secretaries of state, warned the Court that changing the rules now "will almost certainly lead to mistakes, delays, and confusion."

What This Means for Your Ballot

You are not being paranoid if you wonder whether your ballot will count. When the mail rules change in August and are still being litigated in September, confusion is the predictable result. The answer is not to disengage; it is to plan around the uncertainty.

Vote early. Vote in person if you possibly can. If mail is your only option, request your ballot now, return it early, track it, and check your state's deadline, because whether a late-arriving ballot counts depends on where you live.

A Note for Federal Employees on the Hatch Act

Voting early and encouraging other people to vote is not a Hatch Act problem. The Hatch Act restricts partisan political activity by federal employees; it does not restrict you from casting your own ballot or from urging others to participate in the election.

The Bottom Line

The Supreme Court's decision keeps the Postal Service's mail-ballot rules blocked for now. But with a concurrence hinting that the rules may be lawful given more time, unresolved whistleblower allegations about the portal, and a pending request to run voter rolls against Social Security data, this is a story that will continue past the midterms. If you work for the Postal Service and saw this rollout from the inside, Shaun would like to hear what it looked like.

For daily plain-English coverage of the legal developments that affect federal employees, subscribe to our free newsletter.

Legal Disclaimer: This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Federal employment situations are fact-specific and time-sensitive. Please consult a qualified federal employment attorney about your specific situation. You can contact Southworth PC at attorneysforfederalemployees.com.