The Supreme Court order stated that equitable factors do not favor the government regarding the Postal Service regulation.
Posted by Strict Scrutiny, Checked
- Sources
- 3 support
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 95%
Strict ScrutinySep 15, 2026
The Supreme Court's September 14, 2026 order in 26A305 states that the equitable factors 'do not favor a stay,' which matches the claim's core assertion. The order says 'stay' rather than 'the government,' but the claim is a faithful paraphrase of the same point.
What was said
… That is, a majority of justices seem to be of the correct view that the Postal Service does not, in fact, have the authority to engage mass disenfranchisement efforts that would supplant state election rules. Second, the Supreme Court's order said the, quote, "equitable factors do not favor the government." Equitable factors include things such as whether the party seeking relief from the court, here the federal government, is likely to suffer irreparable harm and how the other parties might be harmed as well. …
Strict Scrutiny · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. The Supreme Court's primary order text says the 'equitable factors applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this Court do not favor a stay,' directly supporting the claim's central assertion.[1]
Supports. Coverage by SCOTUSblog and CNN quotes the same sentence from the unsigned order, confirming it concerned the Postal Service mail-ballot rule.[2][3]
Context. The order was a two-sentence unsigned denial of the government's stay request; it gave no reasoning, and the equitable-factors language was tied to the stay application rather than to the government as a party.[1][2]
Sources
3 sources: 1 primary, 1 tier 2, 1 not rated
- 126A305 Postal Service v. California (09/14/2026)supremecourt.gov · primary source · cited for: supports, context
- 2What the Supreme Court's cryptic mail ballot ruling means ...cnn.com · tier 2 · cited for: supports, context
- 3Supreme Court denies Trump administration's request to implement parts of rule on mail-in votingscotusblog.com · not rated · cited for: supports
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- The Supreme Court order stated that the government is unlikely to succeed on the merits regarding the Postal Service regulation.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
- The Supreme Court has an injunction blocking the USPS from implementing new rules.Mixed
- The Supreme Court ruled that Judge Talwani's injunction was premature because the Postal Service rules had not been finalized and the case was not ripe.True
- The Supreme Court decision to disturb the lower court's injunction blocking the Postal Service regulation was a 7-2 decision.True