The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court on Monday to lift lower-court rulings blocking President Trump's executive order requiring citizenship verification before mail ballots are delivered — a move that could determine whether November's midterms operate with basic integrity checks or under the same loose mail-in rules that have eroded public confidence.
Trump's March order directs U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Social Security Administration to build a "state citizenship list" of eligible voters, and instructs the Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on that list. The mechanism is straightforward: prove you're a citizen, get a ballot.
Democratic officials in 23 states and the District of Columbia sued to stop it, arguing the Constitution gives states and Congress — not the president — authority over election rules. Their attorneys claim the order is "ripe for abuse and could cause chaos," according to both AP and The Guardian.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee in Boston, blocked the order in June for the plaintiff states. A First Circuit Court of Appeals panel left her ruling in place over the weekend. Now the DoJ is asking the high court to step in while the lawsuits play out.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer called Talwani's injunction "indefensible," arguing the order merely provides "general policy guidance" and doesn't dictate how states run elections. He noted that agencies are still deliberating over how — or even whether — to implement it, making the lower court's preemptive block a ruling on hypotheticals. Sauer urged speed: any new policies must be in place by August to affect the November 3 elections. A response to the appeal is due August 3.
Both AP and The Guardian include the now-mandatory press caveat that "noncitizen voting has been shown to be rare." That claim deserves scrutiny. Noncitizen voting is a felony punishable by deportation — which means it's inherently difficult to detect and measure. The press treats the absence of enforcement as evidence of absence. Trump has promoted the order as a safeguard against noncitizen voting, and the principle — only citizens decide American elections — is one the public overwhelmingly supports.
The constitutional question is real: the Constitution does assign election administration to states and Congress. But the federal government already regulates elections through the Postal Service, citizenship databases, and a web of federal statutes. The question isn't whether the feds have a role — it's how far that role extends.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta is leading the lawsuit. New York Attorney General Letitia James declined to comment. The Postal Service, citing litigation, wouldn't discuss its plans. Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab's office said it hasn't heard from USPS about next steps.
The Supreme Court's response will shape whether the 2026 midterms operate under new verification rules or the status quo. The broader question remains: can a president use existing federal agencies to enforce citizenship requirements, or does that power sit exclusively with states and Congress? The justices will have to decide — and fast.
