A federal appeals court panel temporarily halted a lower court injunction on July 17, 2026, allowing the U.
S.
Postal Service to proceed with a controversial proposal to tighten restrictions on mail-in voting ahead of the midterm elections.
The three-judge panel for the D. C.
Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay on an order issued by U. S.
District Judge Emmet Sullivan, who had blocked the federal agency from implementing new mail ballot regulations.
Proposed Regulations and Legal Challenges
Originating from President Donald Trump’s March 31 executive order on election integrity, the proposed Postal Service regulations would require state election officials to submit detailed voter lists, complete with unique ballot barcodes, before election mail is transmitted.
Under the policy, federal authorities could refuse to process or deliver election ballots in states that fail to provide approved voter registries or meet the new technical formatting requirements.
During a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing last month, lawmakers questioned Postal Service leadership regarding the compliance mandates and potential ballot delivery refusals.
Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich.
, asked Postmaster General David Steiner: “Yes or no -- if a state refuses to turn their absentee voter list over to the federal government, will the Postal Service still mail their ballots under this proposed rule?”
Steiner confirmed the strict enforcement mechanism: “Under our proposed regulation, no. We would tell the state that we need the manifest.”
The legal challenge brought by the NAACP pointed to a 2021 court-enforced settlement that legally obligates the Postal Service to prioritize election mail delivery through 2028.
However, the appellate panel ruled that the administration faced irreparable harm if barred from finalizing regulations before the upcoming general election.
“In this context, 'there can be no do over' once the election occurs,” the ruling said.
Although the D. C.
Circuit ruling permits the agency to continue its rulemaking process, a separate injunction issued in Massachusetts remains active for 23 states and the District of Columbia.
Official agency representatives declined to elaborate on the ongoing multi-state legal proceedings.
“Because of pending litigation, we have no response to offer on any questions related to the Executive Order or the proposed rule,” said a spokesperson for U.
S. Postal Service.
