Justice Samuel Alito argued that the Postal Service has the authority to implement a regulation governing mail-in ballots.
Posted by Strict Scrutiny, Checked
- Sources
- 5 support2 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 90%
Strict ScrutinySep 15, 2026
Multiple reliable sources, including AP, Reuters, and NYT, report that Alito's dissent argued the Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail and that the rule likely falls within that authority, so the claim that he argued USPS has authority to implement the mail-ballot rule is supported.
The guest relays this claim without endorsing it. It counts as passed on, not against the post.
What was said
… So, Alito packs a lot in. We're gonna just, again, as Melissa said, tick through some of the highlights slash lowlights. Uhm, one is Alito claims that the Postal Service has the authority 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. …
Strict Scrutiny · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. AP reports Alito wrote in his dissent that the Postal Service "has broad authority to regulate the mail" and likely does have the power to enforce Trump's restrictions.[1]
Supports. The NYT and Reuters report Alito, joined by Thomas, dissented, calling the challenge a "Hail Mary pass" unlikely to prevail because of the Postal Service's broad authority to regulate the mail.[2][3]
Supports. The Washington Examiner and GMA quote the dissent: "The Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail," in reference to the USPS rule on mail-ballot envelopes, barcodes, and voter rolls.[4][5]
Context. Alito wrote that he expressed no view on whether the government would succeed on de novo review, so his argument was about the preliminary posture rather than a final merits ruling.[6][7]
Sources
7 sources: 2 fact-checkers, 1 tier 2, 4 not rated
- 1Supreme Court rejects Trump mail ballot restrictions ahead of midtermsapnews.com · fact-checker · cited for: supports
- 2In loss for Trump, US Supreme Court won't let Postal Service restrict mail ballotsreuters.com · fact-checker · cited for: supports
- 3Two Conservative Justices Would Have Allowed Trump's ...nytimes.com · tier 2 · cited for: supports
- 4Supreme Court rejects Trump administration's attempt to ...goodmorningamerica.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 5Alito and Thomas slam Supreme Court upholding 'Hail ...washingtonexaminer.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 6Supreme Court Blocks Changes to Mail-In Voting Ahead of Midtermsfedweek.com · not rated · cited for: context
- 7Supreme Court rules no restrictions on mailed ballotstimes-georgian.com · not rated · cited for: context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- Justice Samuel Alito argued that the Administrative Procedure Act does not allow for challenges to certain Postal Service regulations.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 Supreme Court blocked a Trump administration regulation regarding the United States Postal Service and mail-in ballots.True
- The Supreme Court declined to issue a stay of the lower court's ruling that invalidated the Postal Service's regulation on mail-in ballots.True