That is no the gist of this decision.

The court said the case was premature at this point and states do not yet have standing to sue on the matter.

There is separate order in place that still blocks any of the proposed measures for November 3rd, so his executive order is still in limbo and later legal challenges that do have standing could also allow the court to block any implementation.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/24/supreme-court-mail-voting-trump.html

Quote:

---

But the decision does not immediately allow the Postal Service to put its new mail-ballot system into effect.
A separate nationwide injunction issued Aug. 11 by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston still blocks USPS from implementing the new procedures for the Nov. 3 elections. The administration would have to overcome that order as well.
The distinction was central to the Supreme Court's decision.
The majority said Trump's executive order itself does not require states to change how they conduct elections. Instead, it directs federal agencies to develop policies that could later impose requirements on states. Because those policies had not yet been implemented when 23 states and Washington, D.C., challenged the order, the court said the challenge was premature.

---

Principal Uncertainty said:

---

4 said:

---

gkaggie08 said:

---

I think this time the Court is telling the blue states they have no standing

---

Won't matter, they will do it anyway and dare the federal government to cancel out those votes.

---

They will deliberately discard chain of custody like last time so it will be impossible to sort out invalid ballots and remove them.

---

It's not even a chain of custody...more like a candle wick of custody.

What does the IRS say about your tax return post marked at 12:01 am on April 16?

3 weeks of early voting, in person, photo ID, only mail in voting would be military bases and even those could be a polling location with in person voting.

EFR said:

---

How would the federal government "cancel out" votes in elections run by the states? You do realize the states run elections?

---

The Senate and House can refuse to seat members based on fraud, etc...

These legal decisions are always so GD confusing. It's like trying to interpret Chinese everytime something is issued. Or, this article is dog**** and not written clearly.

So, the SC ruled in favor of Trump that he can move forward with his EO, but then a separate injunction by the same Judge they just overruled still blocks him from doing anything with his EO.

So, WTF can he move forward with? Anything?

And we have no idea WTF his EO even entails until the final paragraph of the article so you have no idea what's even being discussed until the end. Put that paragraph at the beginning for f*'s sake.

I read somewhere that if the president declares a national emergency relating to elections then congress is the only way to overrule that and it has to be 2/3rds based on some court ruling years ago. Don't know if that is true or not.

Texas becoming it's own country can't come soon enough!

Strange how multiple posters openly advocate for election fraud, get called out on it, and the posts advocating for fraud disappear.

EFR said:

---

Strange how multiple posters openly advocate for election fraud, get called out on it, and the posts advocating for fraud disappear.

---

Poor EFR....can't handle valid ID's to vote or to reconcile registered voters with ballots. I wonder why?

Not great if true:

On the Supreme Court decision today -- there Final Rule will now be published on Wednesday, 8/26.

Beacuse the USPS is exempted from the Administrative Procedure Act, there is no 30 day waiting period before it becomes effective -- it becomes effective on Wednesday.

I expect…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) August 25, 2026

Quote:

---

On the Supreme Court decision today -- there Final Rule will now be published on Wednesday, 8/26.

Beacuse the USPS is exempted from the Administrative Procedure Act, there is no 30 day waiting period before it becomes effective -- it becomes effective on Wednesday.

I expect new complaints will be filed on Thursday, and motions for TRO will be made -- and granted -- that same day by Judge Talwani in Mass.

She has already decided the entire exercise is "ultra vires" and nothing in the Supreme Court's decision today addressed that. The Majority said they do not decide today the lawfulness of anything done as a result of the EO.

She will issue a TRO on Thursday, and set a briefing schedule for two weeks on a motion for Preliminary Injunction. She'll take her time, knowing the TRO is in place, then grant the injunion sometime in mid-Sept., and we will be right back where we are today.

The First Circuit is unlikely to reverse her.

AND I think Roberts and Barrett will join the 3 liberals in saying it's too close to the Nov. election to let the regulation go into effect this year.

The only variable that might change is if the DOJ seeks "Cert before Judgment" -- ask SCOTUS to decide the case right now -- since Ultra Vires is a legal issue and it has very narrow application. DOJ could ask SCOTUS to take it up without waiting for the First Circuit.

But I don't think they will do it.

---

Yep, it's a temporary win for now. What would be smart, imho, would be if some red states filed in a friendlier court today, to get a ruling against them allowing the USPS rule to be upheld, and creating a circuit split so SCOTUS has to then resolve it quickly.

But I think we all know that won't happen.

EFR said:

---

Strange how multiple posters openly advocate for election fraud, get called out on it, and the posts advocating for fraud disappear.

---

Legalized fraud - which is what the left has done - is still fraud.

I absolutely believe that is the most likely path now.

What would be really comical would be for the administration to acquire the 2020 voter lists from China, which got them anyway and then use those old lists to check for illegal alien/non-citizen names/addresses this year. Heck, China's probably got the 2026 lists too. The states don't exactly hold these things in an equivalent of a secure compartmentalized info. Facility.

But republicans never push the limits, it's always defense vs. the lawfare/fraud of the commies and their hacks in black robes.

FatZilla said:

---

1 key piece though would be usps has an exact maximum count of MIB, printer cant go brrr to add 5 million MIB votes when only 500k were mailed.

---

It's funny you think that this is some kind of protection.

They'll just print more anyway, mix them up and count them all claiming that they can't tell the good ones from the bad ones and you can't disenfranchise voters.

How many times have we seen in the last 20 years with more votes than voters, yet nothing stopped the count?

There is no measure the left won't ignore because it has been proven over and over that there is no consequence for cheating.

This is what Democrats are terrified of.

Quote:

---

The new mail-in ballot procedure isn't something to be afraid of. It works like this:

1. The state provides a list of the ballots they intend to mail out.

2. USPS assigns a unique barcode to each.

3. When the ballot is mailed out, this barcode is scanned to ensure uniqueness and that it matches. If there is no match or it's a duplicate, it is not delivered.

4. When the voter mails the ballot back, the USPS scans it again and checks to make sure it matches what went out and isn't a duplicate. Any ballots that don't match won't be delivered.

5. This is all done on the exterior envelope. The USPS isn't determining eligibility or deciding who gets a ballot. They can't see the actual votes. They are essentially just ensuring there are no duplicates, that the number mailed in isn't greater than the number mailed out, and that the person mailing one in was the same person who received them.

This is a common sense solution and is completely reasonable.

Why would anyone oppose it unless their intention is to cheat?

---

The new mail-in ballot procedure isn’t something to be afraid of. It works like this:

1. The state provides a list of the ballots they intend to mail out.

2. USPS assigns a unique barcode to each.

3. When the ballot is mailed out, this barcode is scanned to ensure uniqueness…

— Ron Rule (@ronrule) August 25, 2026

The absolute irony of this is that the USPS had a hard requirement for airlines to scan all mail they carried to ensure chain of custody. And they had to scan it 3 times. Upon receipt at departing airport, upon aircraft load, and upon receipt at destination airport.

But similar standards not good enough to protect our constitutional voting rights. F* all Democrats.

ETFan said:

---

Conservatives sure are desperate to cheat. Id call it disenfranchisement, but it's so open and silly at this point, y'all just want to cheat so daddy dictator can keep on your heads.


Disgusting

---

This is your comedy routine, right?

Doesn't Trump use mail in voting? But he raves that it isn't secure?

t_J_e_C_x said:

---

Doesn't Trump use mail in voting? But he raves that it isn't secure?

---

It hasn't been secure, in case you haven't been paying attention. We're trying to make it secure.

t_J_e_C_x said:

---

Doesn't Trump use mail in voting? But he raves that it isn't secure?

---

If he does, we at least know he's a US citizen with right to vote...being the POTUS and all.

As opposed to the massive mail-in campaigns run almost exclusively by Democrats to obfuscate and cheat. They wouldn't be so adamant about doing it, otherwise.

ETFan said:

---

Conservatives sure are desperate to cheat. Id call it disenfranchisement, but it's so open and silly at this point, y'all just want to cheat so daddy dictator can keep on your heads.


Disgusting

---

You think end to end tracking of ballots is cheating? Since when is instituting an audit trail a way to enable cheating? An audit trail is the exact opposite of that.

I'm not sure I'd trust USPS to do this properly, but it's at least a step in the right direction.

t_J_e_C_x said:

---

Doesn't Trump use mail in voting? But he raves that it isn't secure?

---

I'm convinced some people just don't have the capability to critically think without their own bias getting in the way.