The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for President Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting to proceed, a decision that comes as states prepare to send mail ballots to voters in the coming weeks. The court's order, which was not unanimous, allows the administration to move forward with preparations for the policy, though it remains unclear how much can be implemented before the November midterm elections.
The court's conservative majority sided with the administration, with the three liberal justices dissenting. The decision does not necessarily resolve all legal challenges surrounding the order, and additional lawsuits could still delay or limit its implementation, particularly as states and voting groups assess how the policy would affect their election procedures.
Background of the Executive Order
Trump signed the executive order in March, directing his administration to create lists of eligible voters and instructing the US Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to voters included on those lists. The US Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week, but time is running short to impose major changes with some states beginning to send mail ballots to voters in just a few weeks.
The case could be among several election-related disputes reaching the Supreme Court ahead of the midterm elections. Voting procedures are expected to remain a major political and legal issue as states prepare for November.
Legal Challenges and Lower Court Rulings
Democratic officials in 23 states and the District of Columbia sued to block the order, arguing that the US Constitution gives states and Congress the power to run elections and that Trump's changes could lead to chaos and partisan abuse. "The consequences of allowing such transformative changes to take effect so close to this fall's elections would be extreme," lawyers for the states wrote.
A Massachusetts judge blocked the order for the midterms in those states, a ruling upheld by an appeals court; she later issued a nationwide block. Another ruling out of Washington allowed the order to proceed, a decision upheld by an appeals court. The Trump administration appealed on procedural grounds in late July, arguing that states sued too soon. A dozen Republican-leaning states supported the administration's appeal.
The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to allow the administration to proceed with preparations for the changes, and the high court's decision on Monday appears to leave room for additional court challenges that could further slow Trump's order.
Broader Context on Mail Voting
Mail-in voting has long been a target of Trump, who has repeatedly claimed that the method encourages election fraud, despite evidence showing that widespread fraud associated with mail voting is rare. Trump has also used mail-in voting himself. Noncitizen voting is rare and a felony punishable by deportation.
About 30% of all ballots in the 2024 presidential election were cast by mail. A 2025 Brookings Institution study found that fraud is rare among mail ballots, with about four cases of fraud out of every 10 million mail ballots cast. The Supreme Court previously ruled against Trump-backed arguments on mail-in ballots in June, allowing ballots arriving after Election Day to count.
Trump has also pressed for the SAVE Act and proof-of-citizenship voting requirements, part of a broader push on election integrity measures. The case could be one of multiple voting-related challenges before the justices, as states and voting groups assess how the policy would affect their election procedures in the weeks and months ahead.