Federal Judge Refuses to Block Trump Mail-In Voting Executive Order
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., denied a request to temporarily block President Trump’s March 2025 executive order restricting mail-in voting. The order directs creation of nationwide voter eligibility lists and requires the U.S. Postal Service to restrict election mail delivery to listed voters. Judge Carl Nichols ruled challengers—including Democrats and civil rights groups—failed to show imminent harm since no final rules or lists exist yet. The ruling allows renewed challenges later, while separate litigation continues in Massachusetts. Critics call the order an unconstitutional power grab that could disenfranchise millions.
Cross-source coverage
Wire timeline
Judge Upholds Trump Executive Order Tightening Mail-In Ballot Rules
A federal judge on Thursday ruled in favor of President Trump's March executive order that imposes stricter regulations on mail-in voting, rejecting legal challenges brought by Democrats. The order mandates the federal government to compile a list of eligible voters using available citizenship data and directs the U.S. Postal Service to enforce new verification procedures. This decision allows the executive order to remain in effect, marking a significant legal victory for the Trump administration on voting policy. The ruling is likely to face further appeals as the debate over election security and voting access continues.
Just In NewsTrump-Appointed Judge Refuses to Block Executive Order on Mail-In Voting
A federal judge, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, refused to block President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at limiting mail-in voting, ruling that it is too early to intervene as the order has not yet been implemented. The executive order, signed in late March, directs states to notify the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) about mail-in ballot plans and requires USPS to create voter participation lists and refuse delivery of ballots for those not on the lists. Democrats and civil rights groups argue the order is an illegal power grab and unconstitutional, as no law authorizes USPS to require such data or perform election administration. The ruling clears the way for potential disenfranchisement of millions of voters in upcoming midterm elections, though a separate legal challenge in Boston remains pending. Democratic lawmakers have urged the USPS Board of Governors to reject the directive, citing the agency's independence and legal bar against discrimination.
The New RepublicTrump Executive Order on Mail-In Voting Clears Legal Hurdle
A federal judge, Trump appointee Carl Nichols, refused to block President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at limiting mail-in voting for the upcoming midterm elections. The judge ruled that it was too early to issue an injunction because the order has not yet been implemented. The executive order directs states to notify the USPS about mail-in ballot plans and requires the USPS to create voter lists and refuse delivery for those not on them. Critics, including Democratic leaders and civil rights groups, argue the order is unconstitutional and an illegal power grab. A separate legal challenge is pending in Boston, but the ruling clears the way for potential USPS rulemaking that could disenfranchise millions of voters.
The New RepublicTrump-Appointed Judge Refuses to Block Executive Order Restricting Mail-In Voting
A federal judge, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, refused to block President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at limiting mail-in voting, ruling that it is too early to challenge the order as it has not yet been implemented. The order, signed in late March, directs states to notify the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) about mail-in ballot plans and requires USPS to create voter participation lists and refuse delivery of ballots for individuals not on those lists. Critics, including Democratic leaders and civil rights groups, call the order an illegal power grab and unconstitutional. The ruling clears the way for potential disenfranchisement of millions of voters in upcoming midterm elections, though a separate legal challenge in Boston remains pending. Democratic lawmakers have urged the USPS Board of Governors to reject the directive, arguing the president lacks authority over the independent agency and that the order would force USPS to illegally perform election administration duties.
The New RepublicJudge Declines to Block Parts of Trump Mail Voting Order for Now
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., denied a request to temporarily block President Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting in federal elections. Judge Carl Nichols ruled that the challengers—including congressional Democrats, national party committees, and civil rights groups—could not demonstrate imminent harm from the order's two main provisions: creating nationwide voter eligibility lists and directing the U.S. Postal Service to restrict election mail delivery to listed voters. Nichols noted that no final rule or list has been issued yet, so injunctive relief was premature. The order, signed in March 2025, also directs the Justice Department to investigate non-compliant officials and potentially rescind federal funds. The ruling allows challengers to renew their motions if future actions cause harm. Similar lawsuits are pending in Massachusetts federal court. This is part of Trump's broader second-term effort to assert federal authority over elections, including a separate proof-of-citizenship order that has been blocked by lower courts.
Roll CallJudge Declines to Block Parts of Trump Mail Voting Order for Now
A federal judge, Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, denied a request to pause President Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting in federal elections. The order, issued in March, directs the creation of nationwide voter eligibility lists and requires the U.S. Postal Service to restrict election mail delivery to those on state voter rolls. Challengers, including congressional Democrats and civil rights groups, argued the order could cause irreparable harm and chaos in the upcoming midterm elections. Judge Nichols ruled it was too early to determine harm, as the lists and Postal Service rules have not yet been finalized. He allowed challengers to renew their motions if future actions cause harm. The order also directs the Justice Department to investigate non-compliant officials. Separate lawsuits over the order are pending in Massachusetts federal court.
Roll CallJudge Declines to Block Parts of Trump Mail Voting Order, For Now
A federal judge, Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, denied a request to pause President Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting in federal elections. The order, issued in March, directs the creation of nationwide voter eligibility lists and requires the U.S. Postal Service to restrict election mail delivery to those on state voter rolls. Judge Nichols ruled that the challengers—including congressional Democrats, national party committees, and civil rights groups—failed to demonstrate imminent harm, as the Postal Service has not yet issued a rule and the voter lists have not been finalized. The judge left the door open for renewed motions if future actions cause harm. The ruling is part of broader Trump administration efforts to assert federal authority over elections, including previous orders on proof of citizenship and ballot counting, which have been blocked by other courts. Separate litigation over the order is pending in Massachusetts.
Roll Call