Democratic governors press Postal Service to abandon Trump mail-ballot rule after court block

Democratic governors press Postal Service to abandon Trump mail-ballot rule after court blocks election order

A group of Democratic governors is pressing the U.S. Postal Service to withdraw a proposed rule tied to President Donald Trump’s election executive order, opening a new front in the running fight over who controls the mechanics of federal elections and how far the White House can go in shaping voting procedures before the midterms.

The request, sent Thursday in a six-page letter organized by Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, asks USPS to drop a rule that would implement part of Trump’s March order directing federal agencies to assemble citizenship-related voter lists and limit mailed ballots to voters on those lists, according to reporting by The Associated Press. The letter was signed by nine Democratic governors: Pritzker and the governors of California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington and Wisconsin.

The Postal Service proposal comes as the order itself is under legal constraint. A federal judge has blocked Trump’s executive order and barred agencies from implementing it, ruling that the Constitution gives states and Congress — not the president acting alone — the authority to set election rules. That court order is now central to the governors’ argument that USPS should not move ahead with a rule they say would place the mail agency in the middle of voter-eligibility decisions normally handled by state and local election officials.

“Far from ensuring integrity in federal elections,” the governors wrote, according to the AP, “the Proposed Rule would undermine trust in elections, needlessly complicate voting processes, arbitrarily disenfranchise millions of eligible voters, and undermine states’ constitutional role in ensuring free and fair elections.”

The dispute matters because mail voting is no longer a peripheral election issue. It is a routine voting method in many states, used by Democrats, Republicans and independents, and it depends on coordination among state election offices, local clerks and USPS. Any federal rule affecting which ballots can be mailed, delivered or returned would land directly on that infrastructure — and could matter in close congressional and statewide contests.

The Postal Service did not immediately respond to AP requests for comment. The agency filed the proposed rule in the Federal Register in late May, after a judge in a separate lawsuit declined at that time to block the rule because the administration had not yet taken steps to implement the order. Democratic and civil rights groups that brought that lawsuit have appealed, according to AP.

Trump’s March order directed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Social Security Administration to create what the order described as citizenship lists for each state. It also directed the Postal Service to restrict mailed ballots to voters on those lists, AP reported. The White House has framed its election orders as a response to concerns about noncitizen voting and election integrity. Democrats, voting-rights groups and some election administrators say the orders exceed presidential authority and could disrupt lawful voting.

The governors’ letter focuses on the practical effect of assigning USPS a gatekeeping role over ballots. They argued the proposed rule could give the agency “unilateral power to refuse to deliver” ballots if a state does not cooperate with the president’s directives, according to AP. That argument turns on a basic division of responsibility: states administer elections, Congress may regulate federal elections under the Elections Clause, and USPS moves the mail.

The American Postal Workers Union has also objected to the idea that postal employees should be asked to verify voter eligibility. Jonathan Smith, the union’s president, previously said postal workers’ job was not to “verify voter eligibility” but to “move mail from one destination to the next,” according to AP.

The rule fight is the second major courtroom-and-agency battle this year over Trump’s attempt to reshape election administration through executive action. Another Trump order sought to require people to show documented proof of citizenship to register to vote. That order also has been blocked by the courts, AP reported.

The administration’s position is rooted in Trump’s longstanding focus on noncitizen voting and mail voting. Trump has repeatedly argued that stricter federal controls are needed to prevent fraud. Studies and investigations by state and local authorities have found noncitizen voting to be rare. There is also no indication of widespread problems with mail voting. A Brookings Institution report published in 2025 found mail-voting fraud cases were minuscule — about four cases per 10 million mail ballots, according to AP’s summary of the report.

For election officials, the issue is not only whether fraud exists, but who is legally empowered to set safeguards. States already use a mix of registration checks, signature verification, ballot tracking, voter-roll maintenance, provisional ballot procedures and post-election audits. The details vary widely: some states run elections primarily by mail, some allow no-excuse absentee voting, and others require voters to provide a reason to receive a mailed ballot. A federal rule that overlays a national citizenship-list requirement onto those systems would require major coordination and could create new points of dispute close to Election Day.

That is why the governors’ letter is as much about federalism as it is about voting. The signatories are not merely arguing that the proposed USPS rule is bad policy. They are saying the Postal Service lacks authority to implement a presidential directive that a court has already found unconstitutional in core respects. Their position is that once the court blocked agencies from implementing the order, USPS should stop the related rulemaking rather than keep it alive while litigation continues.

The administration and its allies are likely to argue that voters who are eligible should have no difficulty satisfying citizenship-related checks and that election systems need stronger national safeguards. Republicans have made election-integrity bills a central political issue since 2020, and some GOP lawmakers have argued that proof-of-citizenship requirements are necessary to reassure voters. Democrats counter that existing laws already bar noncitizens from voting in federal elections and that broad new documentation requirements can burden eligible voters who lack easy access to passports, birth certificates or naturalization records.

The immediate question is procedural: whether USPS withdraws the rule, keeps it pending, or defends it as litigation continues. But the political stakes are larger. The fight is unfolding as both parties prepare for the 2026 midterm elections, when control of Congress will be on the ballot and election rules in battleground states are likely to receive heightened scrutiny.

Several of the governors who signed the letter lead states that are central to national election politics. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are perennial presidential and Senate battlegrounds. Michigan is not on the letter, but the broader Midwest remains central to both parties’ midterm strategies. California, New York and Washington run large election systems with extensive mail-ballot operations. The governors’ coordinated letter signals that Democratic-led states are preparing to contest the order not just in court filings, but also in agency rulemaking.

For USPS, the dispute presents an institutional challenge. The Postal Service has historically played a logistical role in elections, especially during periods of heavy absentee voting. Election offices rely on the agency for outbound ballots, returned ballots and postmarks used to determine whether ballots were mailed on time. During the 2020 election cycle, USPS operations became a national political issue because of concerns about delivery slowdowns and ballot deadlines. Since then, the agency’s role in elections has remained sensitive precisely because small administrative choices can have consequences in close races.

The proposed rule also raises timing questions. Election administrators typically need months to finalize ballot designs, mailing schedules, voter instructions, vendor contracts and public guidance. If a major federal requirement changes close to voting, the burden falls on local offices that must explain the rules to voters and train workers to apply them. That administrative calendar is one reason election officials often warn against late rule changes, even when a policy is still being tested in court.

The legal backdrop is straightforward but consequential. The Constitution gives states the power to set the “Times, Places and Manner” of congressional elections, while allowing Congress to alter those rules. Presidential authority over election administration is more limited. When a federal judge said only states and Congress — not the president — can set election rules, the ruling placed a constitutional barrier in front of the administration’s effort to use executive agencies to change voting procedures.

That does not end the issue. Court orders can be appealed, narrowed or stayed. Agencies can revise proposed rules. Congress can pass election legislation if it has the votes. But for now, the governors’ letter puts pressure on USPS to acknowledge the existing court block and step back from rulemaking that critics say would entangle the mail system in a legal fight over voter eligibility.

The dispute also shows how election policy fights have moved beyond statehouses and election boards into agencies whose ordinary missions are not political. USCIS and the Social Security Administration hold citizenship and identity records. USPS delivers mail. When those agencies are asked to take on election-related functions, the result is a broader debate over whether administrative data can be used to police ballot access without creating errors, delays or unequal burdens across states.

For voters, the practical concern is simpler: whether they can receive and return a ballot under rules they understand. Supporters of tighter controls say confidence in elections depends on verifying eligibility before ballots are mailed. Opponents say a federal list-based system could wrongly exclude eligible voters, especially if records are incomplete, outdated or difficult to match across databases.

The next step is likely to come from USPS or the courts. If the Postal Service withdraws the rule, the agency would remove one of the immediate implementation paths for Trump’s order. If it keeps the proposal pending, Democratic governors and voting-rights groups are likely to continue pressing the argument that the agency is moving in the shadow of an order that has already been blocked.

For now, the story is a test of presidential power over election administration, not a change voters must navigate immediately. But it is a timely warning sign for the midterm cycle: fights over ballot access, mail delivery and federal authority are already moving through agencies and courts months before most voters cast a ballot.

Sources: Associated Press reporting on the governors’ letter and USPS proposed rule; AP reporting on federal court orders blocking Trump election executive orders; AP summaries of the American Postal Workers Union position and research on mail-voting fraud.