Controversy Over USPS Rule and Trump’s Executive Order on Mail Voting

Lawmakers Criticize Postmaster General’s Proposal

Postmaster General David Steiner faced backlash from lawmakers after proposing a controversial USPS rule. He informed a Senate committee that USPS would not deliver mail ballots unless states provided their voter lists to the Trump administration. When asked if USPS would still send ballots to states that refused, Steiner answered, “No.” He explained the need for states to share the manifest.

Senator Gary Peters, a Michigan Democrat, argued the rule coerced states into sharing sensitive voter data. He remarked that this approach bypassed state control of voter information, which the Constitution protects. “You’re telling the states to trust the federal government with their information, or they can’t mail absentee ballots. This decision denies people the opportunity to vote by mail,” Peters argued.

Senator Margaret Hassan from New Hampshire described the rule as “blatantly illegal” and said it could lower democratic participation. She called for the immediate withdrawal of Steiner’s proposal.

Trump’s Executive Order on Mail-In Voting

The USPS proposal stems from President Donald Trump’s executive order issued on March 31. The order, “Ensuring Citizen Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” targeted reforms in election administration and mail voting ahead of the 2026 midterms.

The order tasked federal agencies to compile lists of verified citizens eligible for mail voting. Additionally, USPS was instructed to only send ballots to individuals on these lists and use barcode tracking for mail ballot envelopes. The order threatened federal funding withdrawal for non-compliant states. Critics believe the order exceeds presidential power since states manage elections, with Congress setting national standards. Legal challenges against the order are advancing through federal courts.

Federal Courts Scrutinize the Executive Order

Democratic-led states and voter rights groups have filed multiple lawsuits, challenging the order’s legality. A Massachusetts federal judge recently allowed some challenges to proceed, questioning the administration’s expanded role in election administration.

One notable lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, includes plaintiffs like the League of Women Voters and U.S. Vote Foundation. They state the order is “plainly unconstitutional” and that its implementation disrupts nonpartisan voting rights efforts.

Marcia Johnson, of the League of Women Voters, emphasized mail voting’s importance for various voter groups. She affirmed, “No president can rewrite election rules or dictate state administration. We will uphold every voter’s right to be heard.”

Trump’s Criticism of Mail-In Voting

President Trump has consistently criticized mail voting, claiming it increases fraud risk despite bipartisan election officials disagreeing. Since his return to office in January 2025, Trump prioritized tightening mail ballot restrictions.

In 2024, he labeled mail voting as “totally corrupt” during a Michigan rally. He reiterated this stance on Dr. Phil, asserting potential for massive fraud with mail-in ballots. Recently, he expressed opposition on Truth Social to Utah adopting an all mail-in ballot system, alleging a liberal shift in voting outcomes.

Future of Mail Voting

Legal outcomes may influence the administration’s ability to implement significant aspects of its mail-voting initiative before upcoming federal elections. Voting-rights groups, state officials, and certain states seek court orders to halt enforcement. The administration argues the measures are crucial for enhancing election security.