US Supreme Court Temporarily Allows New Restrictions on Mail-In Voting

Tuesday 25 August 2026 - 11:00

With just weeks to go before the November midterm elections, the United States Supreme Court has temporarily authorized the enforcement of an executive order by Donald Trump aimed at tightening the rules surrounding mail-in voting. However, this decision does not definitively resolve the legality of the measure.

The campaign for the American midterm elections is unfolding against a backdrop of legal battles over mail-in voting. The US Supreme Court decided on Monday evening to allow, until further notice, the implementation of several provisions of a presidential decree signed on March 31 by Donald Trump.

The decision, adopted with the dissent of three of the nine justices of the high court, comes as preparations for the November vote are already underway. However, it does not constitute a final judgment on the compliance of the decree with American law.

A Presidential Measure Challenged in Court

The decree notably includes a strengthening of the eligibility checks for voters. The federal administration must therefore implement mechanisms to verify the information on voter rolls, with the assistance of federal agencies, including those responsible for immigration and social security.

The text also addresses the methods of delivering mail-in ballots. It specifies that the United States Postal Service may be called upon not to deliver certain ballots in states that do not comply with the new federal requirements.

These provisions had been temporarily blocked by a lower court judge. The Supreme Court deemed that this suspension could not be maintained at this stage, considering that it could cause harm to the federal government.

The Court Does Not Definitively Validate the Decree

However, the scope of the decision should be qualified. The justices of the Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the case and thus did not conclude that all the measures provided for by the decree were legal.

On the contrary, the high court emphasized that its provisional decision did not mean that all measures that could be taken by the administration to implement the decree would necessarily comply with the law.

This distinction could be decisive in the coming weeks. Federal authorities now have increased leeway, while legal challenges may continue.

Mail-In Voting at the Heart of the Electoral Battle

The issue is particularly sensitive in the United States, where mail-in voting plays a significant role in the organization of elections. The new rules proposed by the Trump administration could have concrete consequences on how some voters obtain and return their ballots.

The eligibility verification system is also a point of contention. Opponents fear that new administrative procedures could complicate access to voting for some voters. The federal administration, on its part, defends a strengthening of the controls.

As the midterm elections approach, the Supreme Court's decision thus opens a new phase in this legal tug-of-war. The electoral calendar could now heavily influence the next decisions of the courts.

A Battle Far from Over

By temporarily allowing the application of the decree, the Supreme Court gives a temporary advantage to the Trump administration. But it leaves the central question of its legality open.

The debate is thus expected to continue in American courts, with a major stake: determining how far the federal government can go in regulating voting procedures without encroaching on the electoral prerogatives of the states.

As the November election approaches, mail-in voting thus re-emerges as one of the main fronts in the American political and judicial battle.