Background
In March 2026, President Trump issued Executive Order 14399 directing federal agencies to involve the United States Postal Service in deciding which mail-in ballots would be delivered and requiring states to use specific envelope designs and verify voter citizenship against federal lists. Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia sued, arguing the order was ultra vires and unconstitutional. The district court granted summary judgment for the states, enjoining the federal defendants from implementing the order for the November 2026 election in those states. The federal defendants and twelve intervening states moved for a stay of that injunction pending appeal, arguing the states lacked standing and their claims were not ripe.
The court’s reasoning
The First Circuit applied the four-factor Nken test for a stay and concluded the government failed to make a strong showing of likely success on the merits regarding standing and ripeness. The court found the states suffered immediate injury by having to divert staff and resources to plan for compliance, faced certainly impending financial costs because they had already purchased non-compliant ballot envelopes, and faced a credible threat of criminal prosecution for delivering ballots to voters not on the federal citizenship lists. The court distinguished prior cases like Clapper and New York, noting the executive order explicitly targeted the states and created a direct dilemma for fast-approaching elections. The court also rejected the intervenor states’ prudential ripeness argument, finding the legal question of the President’s authority did not require further factual development.
What it means going forward
The district court’s injunction remains in place, preventing the federal government from enforcing the executive order’s provisions regarding mail-in ballot envelopes and citizenship lists for the November 2026 federal election in the twenty-three plaintiff states and the District of Columbia.