A federal appeals court has cleared the way for a key election-integrity measure backed by President Donald Trump to move forward, at least temporarily. But because of separate rulings issued by another federal court, the policy remains blocked across nearly half the country, setting up another major legal battle over the administration’s election reforms.
On Friday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit stayed a lower court order that had prevented the U.S. Postal Service from implementing a new rule tied to mail-in voting.
The policy would require states seeking certain mail-ballot services to provide voter registration data so that the Postal Service and the Department of Homeland Security could compare voter rolls with federal citizenship records. The administration says the goal is to help ensure that mail ballots are issued only to eligible voters.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People challenged the policy in federal court, arguing that it violated a 2021 settlement agreement with the Postal Service.
U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan agreed, issuing an injunction that temporarily blocked USPS from implementing the new rule.
The D.C. Circuit reached a different conclusion.
In its ruling, the appellate court said the Postal Service had “made a strong showing” that it is likely to prevail on key legal arguments. The panel concluded that the challenge to the rule is likely premature and that the new policy probably does not conflict with the earlier settlement agreement cited by the plaintiffs.
The court also found that the Postal Service would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction remained in place because it would prevent implementation of the rule before the 2026 midterm elections.
“There can be no do over once the election occurs,” the panel wrote.
Despite that victory, the administration cannot yet enforce the policy nationwide.
A separate case pending in Massachusetts has produced a broader injunction affecting 23 states and the District of Columbia.
Last month, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled that portions of President Trump’s executive order on election integrity—including the Postal Service provision—likely exceeded presidential authority and violated the Constitution’s separation of powers.
Her ruling blocks enforcement of the policy in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia while the litigation continues.
In a related case, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper likewise concluded that the executive order exceeded the president’s constitutional authority under the Elections Clause, which assigns primary responsibility for administering elections to the states while allowing Congress to regulate federal elections.
Casper acknowledged that only U.S. citizens are legally permitted to vote in federal elections but concluded that implementing the administration’s proposed verification system would require congressional authorization rather than unilateral executive action.
The conflicting rulings leave the administration with a partial legal victory but an uncertain path forward.
The issue has taken on added significance following recent statements by President Trump regarding election security.
In a recent address, the president asserted that the Chinese Communist Party obtained approximately 220 million American voter records during the 2020 election cycle and used personal information—including names, birth dates, addresses, and other identifying data—to facilitate fraudulent voter registrations and election interference.
Trump also alleged that senior intelligence officials were aware of the activity but failed to disclose it at the time. Those claims remain disputed and have not been established by court findings.
The president further said that a Department of Homeland Security review has identified nearly 300,000 noncitizens registered to vote using data supplied by cooperating states. He argued that because several Democrat-led states declined to participate in the review, the nationwide total could ultimately prove higher.
