Trump's mail-in voting rules raise fears of federal overreach

• The administration's proposed rule for mail-in ballots could scramble the 2026 midterms by forcing local and state officials to adopt an untested federal system on short notice and potentially undermine confidence in U.S. elections.
• The policy would require USPS to review outgoing mail-ballot envelopes for compliance with federal requirements before accepting them.
• Election officials would also have to use a new Federal Ballot Mail Portal to submit personal information about voters receiving mail ballots.

Driving the news: The Supreme Court's Monday decision overturned a lower-court ruling blocking a suit from 23 states and D.C. over the president's executive order, which created a citizenship-list system and changed mail-ballot rules.

• The court ruled that the coalition of states had sued the administration too early. SCOTUS found the lawsuit invalid because the states lacked standing to challenge the executive order, which they said imposed no obligations on the states.

The intrigue: Monday's ruling is "certainly not the end of this story," Jonathan Diaz, director of voting advocacy and partnerships at the Campaign Legal Center, tells Axios.

• "This is not the Supreme Court saying yes, 'this order is legal and constitutional, and you definitely can do this by November.' This was really just a technical ruling about the timing of the district court's order."
• He added that the states are still free to sue the administration once the rule is published in the federal register, which is scheduled for August 26.

Catch up quick: The League of Women Voters of Massachusetts filed a separate motion Saturday seeking to enforce a federal court order blocking USPS from implementing the rules.

• That suit is one of several seeking to block the rules from taking effect. A third Massachusetts case blocks USPS nationwide from enforcing the mail-ballot rules for Nov. 3. Voting rights groups say USPS violated that order by finalizing the rules anyway.
• Two D.C. cases have gone more favorably for the administration but don't erase the nationwide block.

What they're saying: "It would be, I think, functionally impossible for some places to comply with these rules," Diaz says.

• He said the policy could prevent eligible voters from receiving ballots and prove "catastrophic for election administration and for voters."

The other side: White House spokesperson Lauren Bis told Axios in an emailed statement that the "real 'chaos' in our elections is sowed by extreme Democrats who refuse to enact basic commonsense measures that ensure Americans, and Americans only, decide our elections."

• USPS declined to comment because of "pending litigation."

Threat level: The rule would disproportionately harm Americans who rely on mail ballots, including the elderly, voters with disabilities, rural residents, college students, and people working multiple shifts, Diaz says.

• Voters dealing with sudden illness, travel, or hospitalization could also face delays.

Yes, but: Despite Trump's repeated claims that mail-in voting is unsafe, he has voted by mail multiple times, including earlier this month.

• States already use safeguards such as signature matching, witness requirements and ID checks to detect fraud, which remains rare.

Between the lines: Trump's attacks on mail voting could also further undermine public confidence in elections.

• "[H]is rhetoric and then actions like this are solutions in search of a problem," Chris Diaz said, adding that the president has no authority over elections.
• "It's just totally unprecedented for the federal government to be trying to impose a top-down solution... This is just attempting to put a level of federal bureaucracy into a state system that's already working."

What we're watching: Whether the DOJ attempts to use Monday's ruling to get other injunctions lifted.

Go deeper: Trump's mail-in voting restrictions blocked nationwide by federal judge