Reposted by Julie
Here's my breaking news report at Law Dork: www.lawdork.com/p/breaking-s...
lawdork.com
Breaking: SCOTUS rejects Trump admin’s request to enforce new USPS mail ballot restrictions
The brief order denying DOJ’s request for a stay of a lower court order blocking the rule only prompted noted dissents from Justices Thomas and Alito.
![SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
ー
No. 26A305
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, ET AL. U.
CALIFORNIA, ET AL.
ON APPLICATION FOR STAY
[September 14, 2026]
JUSTICE ALITO, with whom JUSTICE THOMAS joins, dissenting from the denial of application for stay.
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.'" NRC v. Texas, 605 U.S. 665, 681-682 (2025). The Government has made the showings necessary for a stay, so I respectfully dissent.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreifag3wso6i5px6jrt3c4li6txu3eh6h37v5djb735itvwzenf2yhy)
![SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 26A305
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, ET AL. U.
CALIFORNIA, ET AL.
ON APPLICATION FOR STAY
[September 14, 2026]
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.
JUSTICE KAVANAUGH, concurring.
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. See 39 U. S. C. §401(2). 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. See 39
U. S. C. §3001(m); 5 U. S. C. §706(2)(A). For that reason, I concur in the denial of the application for stay.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreicqn5lewxb2bkaazujt77bmsjfq4ultwu2alo3emhvgsnpkotnwoy)
