A federal district judge issued a nationwide injunction against the Postal Service regarding ballot mail regulations.
Posted by Badlands Media, Checked
- Sources
- 4 support2 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 90%
Badlands MediaSep 16, 2026
Federal District Judge Indira Talwani issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against the Postal Service's mail-ballot implementation on August 11, 2026, as the court order and several outlets report. The extraction is a faithful paraphrase of the post's reference to the judge's nationwide injunction; the later lifting of that injunction by the Supreme Court does not make the issuance claim false.
What was said
… It It's insane how this judge, this judge, what she's doing, in my opinion, he she needs to be investigated for this decision. Yeah, I agree with that, and many such cases, when we're talking about district judges exceeding their authority, and I mean, this person put in a nationwide injunction after Scalia said she couldn't do nationwide injunctions, right? Like, that's that's what we're dealing with, is they they think they're above the law and the precedent and the rules and the standards, and I think Alito crushed it. Thomas joined the dissent. …
Badlands Media · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. The primary court order (D. Mass., Sept. 4, 2026) states that on August 11, 2026 the court granted a nationwide preliminary injunction enjoining USPS defendants from implementing or enforcing the executive order's mail-ballot provisions for the November 2026 election.[1]
Supports. Bloomberg Government reported that Judge Indira Talwani entered a nationwide order blocking the Postal Service from carrying out the mail-in voting directives, and The Week and Washington Examiner report the same August 11 nationwide injunction.[2][3][4]
Context. The Supreme Court later lifted that nationwide injunction, and Talwani subsequently issued a narrower preliminary injunction on September 4, which does not change whether the August 11 nationwide injunction was issued.[5][6]
Context. The post's reference to Scalia and nationwide injunctions is not part of the extracted claim, and the post's 'this person' refers to the same judge, so the claim does not depart from the passage.
Sources
6 sources: 1 primary, 3 not rated, 2 tier 2
- 1APPENDIX District court order granting preliminary ...supremecourt.gov · primary source · cited for: supports
- 2Judge Widens Block on Trump Mail-In Voting Plan for Midterms (2)news.bgov.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 3Judge blocks Trump’s USPS mail-in voting limitstheweek.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 4Judge says USPS violated mail-ballot order but won't block ...washingtonexaminer.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 5Judge allows Trump's mail-in ballots plan to proceed, at ...nbcnews.com · tier 2 · cited for: context
- 6Judge extends block on Postal Service's new Trump ...cbsnews.com · tier 2 · cited for: context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- The Postal Service issued a rule regarding mail-in ballots while subject to an injunction.True
- A judge in Boston issued two rulings blocking the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out Trump's order to restrict voting by mail.True
- The Supreme Court has an injunction blocking the USPS from implementing new rules.Mixed
- The Supreme Court blocked a Trump administration regulation regarding the United States Postal Service and mail-in ballots.True
- The First Circuit Court of Appeals declined to stay the injunction against the Postal Service rule regarding mail-in ballots.True