Media contact: media@asianlawcaucus.org
Courts Deal the Trump Administration a Third Defeat on Voting Rights in a Week
SAN FRANCISCO – A federal judge yesterday blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing a proposed Trump administration rule that would have restricted mail-in ballot delivery nationwide. The ruling in NAACP v. USPS et al. caps a week in which courts repeatedly rejected efforts to interfere with mail voting ahead of the November midterms.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan found that the Postal Service's proposed rule violates a 2021 settlement agreement requiring USPS to prioritize the timely delivery of election mail. The order applies nationwide, a broader remedy than a June 25 ruling from a Massachusetts federal judge that applied only to the 23 states that brought that case, which was appealed by the Trump administration later on Wednesday.
The proposed rule stemmed from Executive Order 14399, issued in late March 2026, which directed USPS to withhold ballots from voters not on state-approved lists. It comes days after the Supreme Court's June 29 decision in Watson v. Republican National Committee, which upheld a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received up to five days later.
Asian Law Caucus, the nation's first legal and civil rights organization serving Asian American and Pacific Islander communities, released the following statement from executive director Aarti Kohli:
"Three times this week, courts told the Trump administration and the Republican National Committee they cannot rig the rules of mail voting to shut voters out. Today's ruling stops the Postal Service from turning ballot delivery into a loyalty test. Asian Americans are the fastest-growing racial group in the country, and our communities rely on mail voting in high numbers. Every one of these rulings protects that right."
A pattern of attacks on voter access
The USPS ruling is the latest in a string of election-related decisions this term. In April, the Supreme Court gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais, requiring voters challenging discriminatory maps to prove lawmakers intended to discriminate, a nearly impossible standard. On June 30, the Court struck down federal limits on coordinated spending between political parties and candidates in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC, opening the door to a new wave of big-money politics ahead of the midterms.
"The end result of Callais and the FEC ruling is that we are in a new era of big money politics and more partisan gerrymandering, undermining voter power," Kohli said. "The Trump administration has made threats of ICE interference at the polls, intimidated election officials and poll workers, and pressured Congress to disenfranchise eligible voters. Courts are checking these attacks one by one, but they are not the last line of defense. Voters are."
Executive Order 14399 remains the subject of multiple ongoing lawsuits. While courts in Washington, D.C. and Massachusetts. have blocked key provisions, the administration has signaled it intends to keep pressing forward, as reflected by their appeal of the Massachusetts decision.
"This administration has made clear it will keep trying to undermine established, secure voter processes until someone stops it," Kohli said. "With the November elections four months away, now is the time to fight for equal access to the ballot for every voter."