Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court in Boston kept a new Postal Service mail-ballot rule from taking effect on September 4, extending a block first imposed through a temporary restraining order. The Postal Service and the administration are seeking emergency relief from higher courts. [E1] [E2]
The rule sets conditions on how states prepare and track ballot mail; the order under appeal blocks USPS from enforcing them. The rule text itself has not been reviewed here. [E1]
USPS’s authority to impose those conditions before states finish sending and receiving ballots for the November congressional elections is the narrow legal dispute. It reaches the practical handling of ballot mail, including cancellation marks and envelope standards. Reuters reported Talwani’s new injunction at 21:56 UTC on September 4, as election administration was already moving into mailed envelopes. [E2]
In its September 3 emergency application to the Supreme Court, the administration asked to restore the ballot-mail program and tied its implementation timetable to the executive-order process. Those are the government’s arguments for intervention; filing them does not establish that its factual or legal position is right. [E1]
D. Mass. Doc. 285, the September 4 order, has not been read here, so its duration, geographic reach and precise terms are not described. Its application to ballots already entering the mail is unresolved on the public record. [E2]
While the injunction holds, USPS cannot impose the disputed standards on the affected election cycle. If an appellate court or the Supreme Court lifts it quickly, local election officials could have to reconcile federal postal requirements with ballot materials and voter files already in production. A voter’s return envelope would then depend on how quickly officials could make those changes. States had already begun mailing ballots on September 4. [E2]