Statement on Supreme Court Ruling on Mail-In Ballots

This statement is in response to breaking news. Please contact pr@rstreet.org to speak with the scholars.

Last night, the Supreme Court issued an order that continues to bar the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) from implementing new rules regarding mail-in voting. This effectively denied the federal government’s request to implement an executive order President Trump signed in March that would have created new restrictions and steps around mail-in voting.

In response, Matt Germer, Director of the R Street Institute’s Governance program, and Chris McIsaac, a Resident Fellow in Governance, released the following statement: 

“The Supreme Court’s recent order is a prudent decision that ensures stability ahead of the 2026 midterms. The proposed USPS rule would have dramatically altered the processing, handling, and verification of mail-in ballots nationwide. Under our constitutional system, election administration is reserved explicitly for the states—not for centralized federal agencies.

Overhauling election procedures nationwide in the weeks immediately leading up to an election improperly centralizes election administration and introduces unnecessary chaos into the process. While we maintain that ballots should not be distributed more than three weeks prior to Election Day, the reality is that many states have already initiated ballot mailings, and abruptly changing the rules mid-stream infringes upon state-led administration.

Ultimately, this order was a shrewd decision by the Court. Changing election rules right before voting starts disrupts administration, confuses voters, and creates unnecessary risks.”

Matt and Chris have written about the implications of the effort to restrict mail-in ballots as well as why election reform requires Congressional authorization and clear statutory language.