Judge blocks Trump mail-voting EO for federal voter lists and USPS steps (23 states + D.C.)

A federal judge in Massachusetts blocked major parts of President Trump’s March 31, 2026 executive order on mail voting, ruling that Sections 2 and 3 are legally void and stopping the federal government from implementing or enforcing them for the November 3, 2026 federal election (and earlier ones) in 23 states plus Washington, D.C.

The ruling, issued June 25, 2026, comes from U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in civil action 1:26-cv-11581-IT. The challenged order is Executive Order 14399, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections.”

What the executive order tried to do

According to the court’s description of the executive order, the plan combined two main tracks:

• Federal “Confirmed Citizen Lists” (Section 2): USCIS (within DHS), working with the Social Security Administration, would compile and transmit lists of people confirmed to be U.S. citizens, tied to each state’s election administration needs.
• USPS mail-ballot steps (Section 3): USPS would move toward mail-voting rules for federal elections, including specific restrictions tied to ballot handling for elections administered by the plaintiff states.

What the June 25 injunction blocks (and who it binds)

The order enjoins defendants other than the President from implementing or giving effect to Sections 2 and 3 in the plaintiff states for the November 3, 2026 election and earlier federal elections.

• Blocked under Section 2 (federal list-building + enforcement-linked actions): The injunction prevents the government from putting in place the order’s federal list-related program structure for supervising or controlling plaintiff states’ voter-roll maintenance, and it also bars DOJ from initiating investigations or prosecutions in plaintiff states that stem from the unconstitutional Section 2 provisions.
• Blocked under Section 3 (USPS mail-ballot rules + transmission-related steps): The injunction blocks DOJ and USPS from enforcing the order’s specified USPS provisions covering elections mail and ballot envelopes in plaintiff states. The court specifically included limits on refusing to transmit mail-in/absentee ballots from voters registered in plaintiff states to the election officials in those same plaintiff states, and it also blocks the specific rulemaking the order directed USPS to pursue.
• What about Section 5: The judge ruled Section 5 is “merely precatory,” meaning it is not treated as a binding command in the same way as the challenged operative provisions.

Which states were covered

The lawsuit was brought by 23 states plus D.C. The plaintiff states listed in the court order are: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

What the ruling does not stop

The injunction leaves room for some federal activity:

• Non-binding USPS guidance on ballot mail envelopes may still be provided.
• Citizenship/eligibility verification assistance can still be provided if a state requests it and it fits within the framework provided by Congress.

What to watch next

For voters and election administrators in the plaintiff states, the practical question now is how the administration responds—especially whether it seeks additional relief—and whether states adjust their planning assumptions for what federal data transfers and USPS-related enforcement/rulemaking will (or won’t) do for 2026.

Sources

• District of Massachusetts (Judge Indira Talwani) memorandum & order, June 25, 2026 (Executive Order 14399; Sections 2, 3, and 5)
• CBS News report (June 25, 2026) explaining the ruling’s impact on mail-in voting and federal list/USPS steps
• League of Women Voters press release summarizing the ruling’s effect on voter rolls and mail ballots
• Brennan Center analysis (case update context around the executive order challenge)