Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Allow Changes to Mail-In Voting Rules Before Midterm Elections

The Trump administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow President Donald Trump's executive order seeking major changes to the mail-in voting system to take effect before November's midterm elections.

The Justice Department filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court on Monday, asking justices to temporarily lift a lower court's block on the order. The administration argued that unless the new policy is implemented by August, there will not be enough time to put it into effect before the midterm elections.

The court has given challengers until August 3 to respond to the request.

Trump issued the executive order in March directing the creation of a "state citizen voter list" containing eligible voters. Under the order, mail-in ballots would be sent only to individuals included on those lists.

The order also instructed the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Social Security Administration to share citizenship-related information with states. It further directed the U.S. Postal Service to deliver ballots only to listed voters and required the use of secure envelopes with unique tracking barcodes for each ballot.

The order warned that states or local authorities that fail to comply could face suspension of federal funding.

The executive order was challenged by Democratic officials from 23 states and the District of Columbia. The challengers argue that, under the U.S. Constitution, authority over election rules rests with states and Congress—not the president.

They also warned that implementing the new requirements could create opportunities for misuse and disrupt election administration.

In June, Massachusetts federal judge Indira Talwani blocked enforcement of the order in the states that brought the lawsuit. A divided panel of the First Circuit Court of Appeals later upheld that decision.

However, Washington federal judge Carl Nichols previously ruled in a separate case that the issue of blocking the order may have been premature because the administration had not yet implemented it.

Representing the Trump administration, Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the Supreme Court that the executive order is only a broad policy directive and does not directly impose requirements on states. He argued that federal agencies are still determining how to implement the order and that an advance injunction is therefore legally unjustified.

Trump has criticized mail-in voting since his defeat in the 2020 presidential election, repeatedly claiming without evidence that the system is vulnerable to fraud. He has also voted by mail himself in the past.

During an event at a General Motors plant in Michigan on Monday, Trump again urged Congress to pass legislation requiring voter identification and proof of citizenship. He described mail-in voting as "inherently corrupt" and said he hoped the system would no longer be used for elections.

However, federal data show that nearly 30 percent of votes in the 2024 presidential election were cast by mail. A study by the Brookings Institution found that there were only about four cases of fraud per 10 million mail-in ballots.

In June, the Supreme Court also ruled that states may count valid ballots received after Election Day if state law permits it.

The Trump administration says the proposed changes are intended to prevent non-U.S. citizens from voting. However, government data indicate that noncitizen voting is extremely rare and is already a serious crime punishable by penalties including imprisonment and possible deportation.

The U.S. Postal Service has declined to comment on the matter because of the ongoing litigation. The attorneys general offices of California and New York also declined immediate comment. Election officials in Kansas said they had not yet received any instructions from the Postal Service regarding the proposed changes.