Record · the original document behind a story
DOJ makes new appeal for Supreme Court to allow mail voting changes
Published by The Hill on September 6, 2026.
Passages cited in the stories above
… Talwani, an appointee of former President Obama, halted the administration from carrying out the plan a day after Sauer submitted an initial stay application to the Supreme Court. But in filing the administration’s new request for a stay of Talwani’s preliminary injunction, the solicitor general withdrew his Thursday filing. The Supreme Court, which is on recess, will decide the case in an expedited fashion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the three liberals on the high court, was assigned to the administration’s new request. In his Sunday filing, Sauer wrote the policy “is a valid exercise” of the Postal Service’s authority, and “does not regulate state administration” of elections. “The Rule ensures that States remain responsible for determining voter eligibility and eligibility to vote by mail, and it does not dictate ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures,” he wrote. “The Rule thus plainly does not seize control of States’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail,” Sauer added. …
… Talwani, an appointee of former President Obama, halted the administration from carrying out the plan a day after Sauer submitted an initial stay application to the Supreme Court. But in filing the administration’s new request for a stay of Talwani’s preliminary injunction, the solicitor general withdrew his Thursday filing. The Supreme Court, which is on recess, will decide the case in an expedited fashion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the three liberals on the high court, was assigned to the administration’s new request. In his Sunday filing, Sauer wrote the policy “is a valid exercise” of the Postal Service’s authority, and “does not regulate state administration” of elections. “The Rule ensures that States remain responsible for determining voter eligibility and eligibility to vote by mail, and it does not dictate ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures,” he wrote. “The Rule thus plainly does not seize control of States’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail,” Sauer added. But Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Projects, blasted the Postal Service’s policy as “unconstitutional” and accused the Trump administration of “racing” to the Supreme Court to circumvent lower court rulings on Sunday. …
… Talwani, an appointee of former President Obama, halted the administration from carrying out the plan a day after Sauer submitted an initial stay application to the Supreme Court. But in filing the administration’s new request for a stay of Talwani’s preliminary injunction, the solicitor general withdrew his Thursday filing. The Supreme Court, which is on recess, will decide the case in an expedited fashion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the three liberals on the high court, was assigned to the administration’s new request. In his Sunday filing, Sauer wrote the policy “is a valid exercise” of the Postal Service’s authority, and “does not regulate state administration” of elections. “The Rule ensures that States remain responsible for determining voter eligibility and eligibility to vote by mail, and it does not dictate ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures,” he wrote. “The Rule thus plainly does not seize control of States’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail,” Sauer added. …
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow mail-in voting restrictions DOJ makes new appeal for Supreme Court to allow mail voting changes The Trump administration on Sunday again asked the Supreme Court to allow it to restrict mail-in voting this election cycle. In a 40-page emergency application, Solicitor General D. John Sauer asked the justices to immediately permit the administration to bar the U.S. Postal Service from sending mail-in ballots to residents of states that have not submitted a list of eligible voters based on citizenship data. Sauer argued the administration is likely to succeed on the merits in two cases concerning the policy — one a group of Democratic-led states brought against the Postal Service and another the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts brought against the administration. …
… “The Rule ensures that States remain responsible for determining voter eligibility and eligibility to vote by mail, and it does not dictate ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures,” he wrote. “The Rule thus plainly does not seize control of States’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail,” Sauer added. But Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Projects, blasted the Postal Service’s policy as “unconstitutional” and accused the Trump administration of “racing” to the Supreme Court to circumvent lower court rulings on Sunday. “The Postal Service rule is unconstitutional. It is unlawful,” Lakin said in a statement. “And with fewer than 60 days to go before the November election, there is not a shred of evidence that states could comply with it without disenfranchising voters who rely on mail ballots.” She later said, “The preliminary injunction that is now in place preserves the voting procedures that Americans have relied on for decades. It should remain intact to ensure that all eligible voters can cast their ballots and have them counted.” …
… U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani on Friday indefinitely halted the Postal Service’s plan while lower courts decided on the policy. Her ruling came on the day North Carolina began to mail ballots to residents, which Sauer noted in his Sunday filing. Talwani, an appointee of former President Obama, halted the administration from carrying out the plan a day after Sauer submitted an initial stay application to the Supreme Court. But in filing the administration’s new request for a stay of Talwani’s preliminary injunction, the solicitor general withdrew his Thursday filing. The Supreme Court, which is on recess, will decide the case in an expedited fashion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the three liberals on the high court, was assigned to the administration’s new request. In his Sunday filing, Sauer wrote the policy “is a valid exercise” of the Postal Service’s authority, and “does not regulate state administration” of elections. “The Rule ensures that States remain responsible for determining voter eligibility and eligibility to vote by mail, and it does not dictate ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures,” he wrote. …
… The Supreme Court, which is on recess, will decide the case in an expedited fashion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the three liberals on the high court, was assigned to the administration’s new request. In his Sunday filing, Sauer wrote the policy “is a valid exercise” of the Postal Service’s authority, and “does not regulate state administration” of elections. “The Rule ensures that States remain responsible for determining voter eligibility and eligibility to vote by mail, and it does not dictate ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures,” he wrote. “The Rule thus plainly does not seize control of States’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail,” Sauer added. But Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Projects, blasted the Postal Service’s policy as “unconstitutional” and accused the Trump administration of “racing” to the Supreme Court to circumvent lower court rulings on Sunday. “The Postal Service rule is unconstitutional. It is unlawful,” Lakin said in a statement. “And with fewer than 60 days to go before the November election, there is not a shred of evidence that states could comply with it without disenfranchising voters who rely on mail ballots.” …
… The Trump administration on Sunday again asked the Supreme Court to allow it to restrict mail-in voting this election cycle. In a 40-page emergency application, Solicitor General D. John Sauer asked the justices to immediately permit the administration to bar the U.S. Postal Service from sending mail-in ballots to residents of states that have not submitted a list of eligible voters based on citizenship data. Sauer argued the administration is likely to succeed on the merits in two cases concerning the policy — one a group of Democratic-led states brought against the Postal Service and another the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts brought against the administration. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani on Friday indefinitely halted the Postal Service’s plan while lower courts decided on the policy. Her ruling came on the day North Carolina began to mail ballots to residents, which Sauer noted in his Sunday filing. Talwani, an appointee of former President Obama, halted the administration from carrying out the plan a day after Sauer submitted an initial stay application to the Supreme Court. But in filing the administration’s new request for a stay of Talwani’s preliminary injunction, the solicitor general withdrew his Thursday filing. …
… But Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Projects, blasted the Postal Service’s policy as “unconstitutional” and accused the Trump administration of “racing” to the Supreme Court to circumvent lower court rulings on Sunday. “The Postal Service rule is unconstitutional. It is unlawful,” Lakin said in a statement. “And with fewer than 60 days to go before the November election, there is not a shred of evidence that states could comply with it without disenfranchising voters who rely on mail ballots.” She later said, “The preliminary injunction that is now in place preserves the voting procedures that Americans have relied on for decades. It should remain intact to ensure that all eligible voters can cast their ballots and have them counted.” Updated at 6:00 p.m. EDT Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
… U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani on Friday indefinitely halted the Postal Service’s plan while lower courts decided on the policy. Her ruling came on the day North Carolina began to mail ballots to residents, which Sauer noted in his Sunday filing. Talwani, an appointee of former President Obama, halted the administration from carrying out the plan a day after Sauer submitted an initial stay application to the Supreme Court. But in filing the administration’s new request for a stay of Talwani’s preliminary injunction, the solicitor general withdrew his Thursday filing. The Supreme Court, which is on recess, will decide the case in an expedited fashion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the three liberals on the high court, was assigned to the administration’s new request. In his Sunday filing, Sauer wrote the policy “is a valid exercise” of the Postal Service’s authority, and “does not regulate state administration” of elections. “The Rule ensures that States remain responsible for determining voter eligibility and eligibility to vote by mail, and it does not dictate ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures,” he wrote. …
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow mail-in voting restrictions DOJ makes new appeal for Supreme Court to allow mail voting changes The Trump administration on Sunday again asked the Supreme Court to allow it to restrict mail-in voting this election cycle. In a 40-page emergency application, Solicitor General D. John Sauer asked the justices to immediately permit the administration to bar the U.S. Postal Service from sending mail-in ballots to residents of states that have not submitted a list of eligible voters based on citizenship data. Sauer argued the administration is likely to succeed on the merits in two cases concerning the policy — one a group of Democratic-led states brought against the Postal Service and another the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts brought against the administration. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani on Friday indefinitely halted the Postal Service’s plan while lower courts decided on the policy. Her ruling came on the day North Carolina began to mail ballots to residents, which Sauer noted in his Sunday filing. …
… “The Rule thus plainly does not seize control of States’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail,” Sauer added. But Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Projects, blasted the Postal Service’s policy as “unconstitutional” and accused the Trump administration of “racing” to the Supreme Court to circumvent lower court rulings on Sunday. “The Postal Service rule is unconstitutional. It is unlawful,” Lakin said in a statement. “And with fewer than 60 days to go before the November election, there is not a shred of evidence that states could comply with it without disenfranchising voters who rely on mail ballots.” She later said, “The preliminary injunction that is now in place preserves the voting procedures that Americans have relied on for decades. It should remain intact to ensure that all eligible voters can cast their ballots and have them counted.” …
… “The Rule thus plainly does not seize control of States’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail,” Sauer added. But Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Projects, blasted the Postal Service’s policy as “unconstitutional” and accused the Trump administration of “racing” to the Supreme Court to circumvent lower court rulings on Sunday. “The Postal Service rule is unconstitutional. It is unlawful,” Lakin said in a statement. “And with fewer than 60 days to go before the November election, there is not a shred of evidence that states could comply with it without disenfranchising voters who rely on mail ballots.” She later said, “The preliminary injunction that is now in place preserves the voting procedures that Americans have relied on for decades. It should remain intact to ensure that all eligible voters can cast their ballots and have them counted.” Updated at 6:00 p.m. EDT Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Read the original · Open the copy we saved
Where we use it
About this saved copy
The fingerprint identifies the saved text used for this record. A different copy has a different fingerprint.
- Text fingerprint (SHA-256)
2fd6b1e4330c4c8704677d6c35bff69c06b8c6c2669ee7240624a729995071af