Justice Samuel Alito argued that the Administrative Procedure Act does not allow for challenges to certain Postal Service regulations.
Posted by Strict Scrutiny, Checked
- Sources
- 1 support4 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 60%
Strict ScrutinySep 15, 2026
ABC News reports that in his eight-page dissent Alito wrote the Postal Service is broadly exempted from the administrative law used to challenge agency actions as arbitrary and capricious, which matches the claim that the APA does not allow challenges to certain Postal Service regulations.
The guest relays this claim without endorsing it. It counts as passed on, not against the post.
What was said
… to implement this regulation that might disenfranchise literally millions of people and erase state laws governing mail-in ballots, in some ways both on procedural and substantive grounds, both because the Postal Service has this substantive authority and because he says the Administrative Procedure Act doesn't actually allow you to challenge certain kinds of Postal Service regulations. And one of the ways he does that is by focusing on a particular regulation of Postal Service power, including its power to dispose of stuff in the mail that is supposed to be limited to non mailable matters, like stuff that exceeds size and weight limits, …
Strict Scrutiny · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. ABC News reports that Alito wrote the Postal Service is broadly exempted from the administrative law frequently used by states to challenge arbitrary and capricious actions.[2]
Context. Alito's dissent, joined by Thomas, argued the USPS policy falls within the Postal Service's broad statutory authority, and he also argued some plaintiffs lacked standing.[3][5]
Context. Kavanaugh's concurrence disagreed on the APA point as applied, finding the rule arbitrary and capricious under the APA because election officials lacked time to implement it, but not contesting Alito's reading of the Postal Service's APA exemption.[1][4]
Sources
5 sources: 1 primary, 2 not rated, 1 tier 2, 1 tier 1
- 126A305 Postal Service v. California (09/14/2026)supremecourt.gov · primary source · cited for: context
- 2Supreme Court rejects Trump administration's attempt to restrict mail-in votingabcnews.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 3Supreme Court Refuses to Block Lower-Court Ruling Against Trump's Mail-in Ballot Executive Orderreason.com · tier 2 · cited for: context
- 4Supreme Court won't restore Trump's mail-in voting plan ...thehill.com · tier 1 · cited for: context
- 5Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to lift block on mail-in ...cnbc.com · not rated · cited for: context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- Justice Samuel Alito argued that the Postal Service has the authority to implement a regulation governing mail-in ballots.True
- Justice Samuel Alito compared the Postal Service's mail-in ballot regulation to the requirement to list a recipient's address on mail.Can’t tell
- Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the Supreme Court decision to block a Postal Service regulation regarding mail-in ballots.True
- The Postal Service is exempt from review under the Administrative Procedure Act.True
- The Supreme Court ruled in favor of states challenging the United States Postal Service's election rulemaking process.True