The Sinister Six Really Could Have Stayed Out Of This

Because I really don’t think they want to declare this rule, constitutional:

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani on Thursday granted a fourteen-day temporary restraining order freezing the mandatory core of the U.S. Postal Service's rule for any election on or before November 3, including envelope-design approvals, voter enrollment in a new federal portal and provisions letting USPS refuse to mail non-compliant ballots.

So, all 50 states have to submit ballot envelope designs for approval; all voters using mail in ballots have to enroll at a new federal portal; and USPS gets to decide whether your ballot can use their mail service. What could go wrong? Especially with a service that has failed for years to deliver my weekly New Yorker magazine on a regular basis, or sometimes at all. And failed for weeks to deliver my mail. I’m sure they can set up a system to set the design of the envelope, communicate that information to all 50 states, review those designs, communicate acceptance/flaws to all 50 states, and then sit back. USPS can get all that done in…how many years?

Voter suppression for rural and old (in Texas, you can vote by mail just because you are 65 or older) voters. Who tend to be GOP voters. Tell me again why they think this is a good idea?

First serious legal question: under what legal theory is USPS in charge of state regulation of mail in ballots? I don’t think even Congress could give USPS that authority. Congress can certainly take it away.

I’m through relying on the courts, if you can’t tell. The trial court has wisely issued a TRO, and is likely to make that a temporary injunction. If I understand correctly, the appeals court had ruled on the states’ case, but not the LWV case; which is why the Supremes didn’t rule on the latter. And why the DOJ said it wasn’t fair to make them follow the rules:

Days ago, the DOJ said plaintiffs could "simply amend their complaint." But once they did, it reversed course and argued they were now too late because "appellate review in the ordinary course would come too late for the 2026 midterms." Talwani rejected the DOJ's pivot.

"But the question is not when appellate review will be completed," Talwani wrote. "The issue before the court is whether plaintiffs have met the traditional standards for emergency relief."

This rule is already too late for the 2026 election. It will take years to implement; or you can just declare voters disenfranchised. It’s also a stunningly unconstitutional rule. It is one Congress can cancel, but not one even Congress can authorize. The Sinister Six did not rule on the validity of this rule, because it hadn’t been published when their opinion was published.

As the judge found today:

She found the states likely to win and ruled the USPS lacked authority to regulate election mail. The postal service's interest in "correcting an unsubstantiated problem through likely unconstitutional means is dwarfed by the overwhelming risk of pervasive disenfranchisement," she wrote.

I’m sure the Sinister Six would respond: “Yeah, but…unitary president.” Which is why  Congress needs to end this. If not now, then next year. Trump is threatening the election for Republicans and Democrats alike, but even more so for Republicans. Republicans who refuse to respond to that fact, deserve to be tossed out of office. That’s not the only reason, but it’s the best one right now.