A judge in Boston issued two rulings blocking the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out Trump's order to restrict voting by mail.
Posted by Up First from NPR, Checked
- Sources
- 4 support2 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 88%
Up First from NPRAug 25, 2026
Sources confirm that Boston-based Judge Indira Talwani issued two rulings blocking USPS from implementing Trump's mail-voting order: one on June 25 covering 23 states plus D.C., and a broader one on August 11 covering the whole country.
What was said
… The justices have not ruled on whether President Trump's order is legal, and so far, this order has not directly affected mail-in voting. So what effect does yesterday's Supreme Court ruling actually have, then? Well, here's a way to think about this. There have been two rulings from a judge in Boston. They both block the Us. Postal Service from carrying out Trump's order to restrict voting by mail, and I should note, USPS is a financial supporter of NPR. Now what the Supreme Court has done is pause the first of those two rulings. This first one blocked USPS from working on Trump's order in about half of the states, plus Washington, DC. …
Up First from NPR · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. Reuters reports that Boston-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani extended an injunction stopping the administration from implementing the USPS mail-in voting rule, after earlier rulings in the case.[1]
Supports. NPR reports that on June 25 a Boston-based judge blocked key parts of Trump's order, and that another federal judge separately blocked USPS election mail rules.[2]
Supports. AP, via Boston.com, reports that Talwani ruled again on August 11 against Trump's executive order, following her earlier June 25 order that halted the core parts of it.[3]
Supports. The Herald News reports that on August 11 Talwani blocked USPS from implementing the order anywhere in the nation, expanding on her June ruling that covered 23 mostly Democratic-led states.[4]
Context. CNN reports a later temporary restraining order from Talwani against the USPS plan, showing the Boston court continued to issue blocking orders.[5]
Context. The Supreme Court paused the first, June ruling as applied to the states. Houston Public Media reports Talwani canceled the nationwide ruling on August 26, a later development that does not change whether the two rulings were issued.[2][6]
Sources
6 sources: 1 fact-checker, 2 tier 2, 3 not rated
- 1US judge again blocks Postal Service's mail-in voting ...reuters.com · fact-checker · cited for: supports
- 2Trump appeals a ruling that blocks parts of his order to restrict voting by mailnpr.org · tier 2 · cited for: supports, context
- 3Judge again bars Trump administration from implementing ...boston.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 4Boston judge blocks restrictions on mail-in voting again. What’s nextheraldnews.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 5Judge pauses US Postal Service plan to implement Trump’s new mail voting restrictions | CNN Politicscnn.com · tier 2 · cited for: context
- 6Judge clears the way for Postal Service work on Trump's mail-in voting order for nowhoustonpublicmedia.org · not rated · cited for: context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- A federal district judge issued a nationwide injunction against the Postal Service regarding ballot mail regulations.True
- A judge in Boston concluded in June that Donald Trump's executive order on mail-in ballots oversteps the president's authority under the Constitution and that the USPS has no legal authority to control mail and voting.True
- The Supreme Court blocked an executive order from the Trump administration that sought to change mail voting processes and give the U.S. Postal Service new abilities to decide who to deliver mail ballots to.True
- 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