On June 1, 2026, I posted an HWR article entitled "USPS Proposed Rule Would Require States to Provide Mail-in Voter Lists" which a) describes an executive order issued by Trump on March 31, 2026 entitled "Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections", and b) documents the legal challenges filed afterwards.

On September 14, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 against the USPS rule directed by Trump's executive order.

Watch/listen to Brian Tyler Cohen's response here.

Watch/listen to Rachel Maddow's response here.

Watch/listen to Marc Elias' response here

Here's a summary of Elias' analysis, along with quotes from the official Supreme Court ruling:

• The ruling was short, stating:
  

  The application for stay presented to Justice Jackson and by her referred to the court is denied. The government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the district court's preliminary injunction and the equitable factors applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this court do not favor a stay.

• Translated, the ruling says that the Supreme Court believes the DOJ's position is, at least, likely not correct. If the actual case was heard in a full-blown hearing on the merits, it's likely that the states and the nonprofit organizations who brought this lawsuit would prevail. In other words, the Trump administration is wrong on the law, and the DOJ is wrong on the "attendant circumstances" and what the implementation of the USPS rule would mean more broadly to the public and to our elections.
• We know for sure that the ruling is a six-justice majority which makes it "durable" and relevant for future lawsuits.
• Justice Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion, part of which states:
  

  In my view, based on the briefing the Court has received at this interim stage, there is at least a fair prospect that the final rule falls within the Postal Service's statutory authority.

  But applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections.

• Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. Alito wrote the dissent, part of which states:
  

  The Court incorrectly denies the Government's application for a stay of a universal injunction that bars implementation of a final rule concerning election ballot mail. Some of the plaintiffs lack standing, while the remainder are pursuing a claim that this Court has recently called a "'Hail Mary pass'" that "'rarely succeeds.'"

  The Government is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal. To begin, the District Court issued a nationwide injunction based on claims asserted by several plaintiff organizations that likely lack standing.

  As for the plaintiff States, their claims are unlikely to succeed. They claim the rule violates the Elections Clause. U. S. Const., Art. I, §4, cl. 1.

  Because litigants cannot convert claims that a federal entity has "acted in excess of [its] statutory authority" into constitutional claims, see Dalton v. Specter, 511 U. S. 462, 472–474 (1994), the crux of the dispute is whether the Postal Service has statutory authority to issue the rule. To assert a claim that an agency exceeded its statutory authority, the challenger needs a cause of action, which is typically provided by the Administrative Procedure Act. 5 U. S. C. §§702, 704. However, Congress broadly exempted "the exercise of the powers of the Postal Service" from review under the APA.

  Since the plaintiff States cannot proceed under the APA, they must instead invoke an equitable cause of action known as an ultra vires claim...Such a claim is thus "'essentially a Hail Mary pass'" that "'rarely succeeds.'"...That Hail Mary pass is unlikely to be successfully completed here. The Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail.

  The remaining equitable factors favor a stay as well. The Government will suffer irreparable harm absent relief. "Because reversal of the District Court's [injunction] would come too late for the 2026 midterms, the District Court's errors deal a serious setback to the Executive's goals while this litigation unfolds."

  As for the equities, the Government has a strong interest in enforcing the rule, and implementing it will also "enhance the visibility of Federal Ballot Mail" in order to better detect election fraud. 91 Fed. Reg. 54972. On the other side of the balance, the plaintiff States invoke the practical effects of implementing the rule close to the midterm elections. I take that problem very seriously, but it is not enough to convince me to deny the application.

  Second, the plaintiff States and the courts bear a substantial share of the blame for the rule's timing...For months, this litigation cast a cloud over the Government's ability to issue a final rule...Not only was the Government subject to months of premature litigation and a series of injunctions that this Court later determined were likely issued without jurisdiction, the Government had to wait nearly another full month for this Court to issue its decision so holding.

• Trump and his administration will find another way to escalate the fight to "something more extreme, more outrageous."
• Celebrate this victory for the pro-democracy movement.
• Regarding the September 13, 2026 ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani, that ruling only blocks the USPS rule for the upcoming 2026 elections. However, the ruling does not limit the ability of states to voluntarily comply with the USPS regarding its rule, which means that red states might choose to implement it.
• Late in the day on September 13, 2026, a different judge, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols ruled against the USPS rule, and that ruling applies to 2026 and beyond.
• Because the District Court and Supreme Court decisions only apply to the USPS rule part of Trump's executive order, the part of the order instructing the Department of Homeland Security to create state citizenship lists, and then send them to states, that part of the order is still in effect. DHS will, most likely, send out state citizenship lists, and then the DOJ (as instructed in Trump's executive order) will prioritize the prosecution of election officials who allow non-citizens to vote.
• A whistleblower claims that the DHS has ordered its agents to unlawfully access state voting records to carry out DHS escalating elections-related probes. This escalation will result in is mass voter challenges and mass voter purges.
• We are going to see the misuse of federal officials and federal law enforcement in and around the voting process.

On September 14, 2026, Tom Fitton, president of the far-right legal group Judicial Watch, responded to the ruling on X:

Furthering naked judicial interference in the 2026 elections, the Supreme Court has thwarted President Trump's modest efforts to ensure that the mails aren't used for voter fraud. The courts, at the behest of the Left, have delayed simple Postal Service rule changes for months and now the Supreme Court, which aided and abetted these delay, seems to pretend is "too late" to protect our elections two months from now.

Here are a few selected comments on Fitton's post (my comments are indented, in italics):

Pray for Our Country @Pray4USA2026"

We've lost our Country, Tom. It's past time for the Civil war option. We have a corrupt Congress, a corrupt Supreme Court, a corrupt Fed, and every single government agency is corrupt, and our country is full of corrupt illegals from other countries. The media lies to us, it's all propaganda. It's over, People. America is done.

@PCTomr18 @pctomr18:

SCOTUS is corrupted and needs to be investigated

Steve in Baja @SteveTheWeege:

Chief Justice Roberts' legacy will be the destruction of the USSC's relevancy when Dems retake Congress. Much blame should (but prob won't) go to Jim Jordan, but really the republicans as a whole are culpable. They let this raft of leftist judges appointments happen over decades.

WithoutRepresentation @TheBigFraud2020:

Declare a National Emergency and demand States voter rolls. If States governors don't comply, arrest them.

Venitta Ricci Ferguson @venitta:

Something/someone is controlling at least three among the nine - what/who MUST be revealed and removal from the Court MUST follow

Frank Bond @TrustButVeri:

The glacial pace that the Supreme Court moves at assures that justice is denied. Leftist politicians bank on it to implement obviously unconstitutional policies. When their unconstitutional laws are overturned they simply pass a new flavor of it and start the glacier down the valley again.

Jeri Nicholson Lerner @Jeri_Lerner:

So extremely disappointed in the SCOTUS & lifetime appointments. Thomas & Alito have what it takes for Lifetime Appointment - the others do not.

OrlandoCamper @clanrosa:

Trump is trying to legislate laws through the SCOTUS. The Congress is responsible to legislate laws. The problem is republican congress is useless. Don't blame the Supreme Court.

WG Bates @wgbates:

Perhaps if there had been some significant arrest for voter fraud, the SC would have been more inclined to support Trump. All we hear about is people finding things that are illegal.....and no one gets arrested.

Linda Jessup @Kellyvillelinda:

If we can't protect our elections, then we shouldn't have elections. Zelensky called off elections, why can't we?

Jim Bitters @monemavasia:

The @USSupremeCourt has effectively ordered the Administration to facilitate criminal enterprise. Remember this the next time you volunteer to drive your buddies to their next bank heist because they ran out of time to find another driver. The Supreme Court of the United States of America has just apparently sanctioned it. @WhiteHouse @PressSec #America #USA

Gman1963 @Gman1963Maine:

SCOTUS dropped the ball on birthright citizenship and now securing our elections. Why are they hell bent on destroying our country? Do they also suffer from TDS?

JL831 @JL831Beer:

moron MAGAt's have gone to court over voter fraud a couple dozen times. they've lost every case, becuz NO ONE has any proof. Fitton - do you have any proof that no one else has? then let's see it. if not - STFU. Vote Blue this fall to shut-up assholes like Fitton

AnimalFarm@animalfarmnow:

Yes, it is disgraceful and civil war is becoming more likely. Both Congress and the Supreme Court have abandoned the rule of law.

For the record, there were 261 comments on Fitton's post.

Read other conservative responses to this ruling here.

On September 15, 2026, Trump responded to the ruling on Truth Social:

Republicans just got another bad decision from the United States Supreme Court, one that the Court System took forever to give, and then blamed it, in part, on no time left to implement a solution to our totally CORRUPT and out of control Mail-In voting "disaster," which is a laughing stock all over the World, and where we are the only country that has to endure such a Nation Destroying SCAM. Justices Alito and Thomas, legends both, strongly disagreed with this horrible, highly political, ruling. It is a big loss for Republicans, and America itself, and makes cheating by the Radical Left "Dumocrats," on Mail-In Ballots, a much easier thing to do - And now they have an open field to do so! The Supreme Court has really let our Country down! Certain Justices are petrified of these crazed and depraved Democrats, and are totally unable to show the courage necessary to save our America. Their horrible decision on Tariffs will be costing the U.S.A., for many years to come, Trillions and Trillions of Dollars. They didn't even state, "money paid does not have to be paid back," much to the benefit of entities that truly hate our Country, and have been RIPPING IT OFF FOR YEARS, unnecessarily costing us, immediately, Billions of Dollars. Likewise, the Supreme Court's Decision on Birthright Citizenship is a complete and total disaster for America, and has already led to massive corruption with respect to "citizenship" in our Country. The damage done to America is incalculable, and they know this, just as everyone else does - It is an irreparable and unrecoverable harm! The Court's inability and unwillingness to do the right thing for our Country will go down, in a very negative way, in the annals of History. This Supreme Court is bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left into making decisions that have set America back at least a hundred years. These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves, a Court that is costing the United States Trillions of Dollars with shockingly bad rulings that are of such magnitude that it won't be easily possible for our Country to recover or heal. It is a Court that will go down as having rendered some of the most destructive, hurtful, and damaging decisions in our Country's history. It is not easy for me to write this criticism of the United States Supreme Court - it will likely cost me dearly for years to come - but I feel it my obligation and duty, as President, to do so for the America we love! Thank you for your attention to this very important matter. God bless the U.S.A. President DONALD J. TRUMP

Commentary:

Regarding Fitton's post on X, it's clear that Fitton is an election denier.

What is more enlightening to me are some of the comments made on his post. I spent some time reading through some of the comments because I wanted to read, first hand, right from the "horses' mouth," what people are thinking.

It's clear from my reading that radical, right-wing, MAGA Republicans are alive and well in America! It's also clear that they are the most "B-squared F" (beyond, beyond FUBAR) group of people I have ever in my life had the extreme displeasure of experiencing!

They are all nuts.

They are all dangerous and a threat to American democracy.

Trump calls mail-in balloting "totally CORRUPT," "out of control," a "disaster," and the "laughing stock all over the World." He also says "we are the only country that has to endure such a Nation Destroying SCAM."

All of Trump's bluster is nothing more than his relentless perpetuation of the "Big Lie." That's it. There's really nothing more to say.

Trump called Justices Alito and Thomas "both legends." I don't call them "legends," I call them radical conservatives who we can always count on to do Trump's bidding.

Trump said that some justices are "petrified of these crazed and depraved Democrats." Trump seems to be saying that this ruling was influenced by fear of physical harm from radical Democrats. Trump continues by saying that the Supreme Court is "bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left." This is just another Trump "gaslight special." He's using this ruling as an opportunity to vilify Democrats and liberals. The nine justices ruled according to their legal analysis and their beliefs, period, full stop.

Regarding the recent Supreme Court decision on birthright citizenship, Trump says that the justices "know", like "everyone else" that the damage done to America is "incalculable," "irreparable," and "unrecoverable." What a bunch of B.S! NO, the justices don't "know" that, and NO not "everyone else" knows that, and NO to all of those adjectives Trump used to describe the "harm."

Trump says that the justices he chose to serve on the Supreme Court (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett) are "merely a shell of their original selves." Wow, that's some kind of statement! Trump ALWAYS has to come up with some kind of excuse for his failures and his losses. He can't just accept the fact that he's wrong, a lot, so be blames someone or something else. This is the sign of a very fragile and massive ego, which I have commented on previously ad nauseam.

Regarding Justice Samuel Alito's dissent, both he and Justice Clarence Thomas are known for taking not only very conservative stances, but also for making rulings based on complicated and sometimes convoluted interpretations of past case law. I've read some of their decisions and opinions in the past and they typically go into excruciating detail about past cases, using those cases to justify their opinions.

I think that prior case law should always be considered, but using case law to justify an opinion without seriously considering the practical implications of an opinion is not acceptable.

It's clear to me that both Alito and Thomas are very conservative Trump supporters. They are NOT being objective in their decisions when it comes to anything related to Trump or his administration.

I must give some credit to Justice Brett Kavanaugh for siding with the majority and recognizing that there is more to good jurisprudence than just analysis of past case law.

One final note...

Now that Trump's USPS mail-in voting scheme has been shut down, this ruling will embolden Trump to declare a bogus "national emergency" regarding the upcoming elections. He will use this ruling to further justify that declaration.