Trump administration appeals latest temporary block on mail-in voting changes

The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday appealed a temporary block on the U.S. Postal Service’s new mail-in ballot regulations, an apparent bid to fast-track legal proceedings as the midterms loom just months away.

The notice from DOJ lawyers follows a late-night ruling from a federal judge in Boston on Thursday that barred the Trump administration from implementing certain provisions of the Postal Service’s rule for at least 14 days.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani sided with a group of Democratic-led states and private rights groups that have been fighting President Trump’s executive order in court, finding that they were likely to succeed in their claims that the restrictions are unconstitutional.

She also contended that it would be “practically impossible” for states to fully comply with the rule by November given the tight timeline, posing an “overwhelming risk” of disenfranchisement for voters who rely on mail ballots.

“In light of the State election officials’ unrebutted declarations that compliance with the Final Rule at this late date is impossible, the risk of irreparable harm to voters in those jurisdictions is grave,” said Talwani, an appointee of former President Obama.

The jump to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals caps off what has been an up-and-down week in the Trump administration’s effort to crack down on mail-in voting during a pivotal election cycle.

The Postal Service issued its final rule last Friday and had said as recently as Thursday that it was in effect, coming on the heels of a procedural victory at the Supreme Court at the start of the week.

The high court, over the dissent of the three liberal justices, held that a previous challenge from blue states had been brought prematurely so Talwani lacked authority to block it.

The justices did not weigh whether the rule was ultimately lawful, saying only that parties had to wait until it was finalized to sue.

That prompted Talwani to lift her remaining nationwide injunction despite finding that the administration had violated her earlier order by moving ahead with the rule.

Challengers argued in new filings this week that the restrictions interfere with the states’ constitutional authority to administer their own elections, asking the court to block the requirements again now that they believe they have standing.

The Justice Department pushed back on the notion that the federal government was trying to seize control of elections, writing that the rule imposed only “modest informational requirements.”

“The Rule does not displace a single State election law. And it need not and should not prevent a single voter from voting by mail,” DOJ lawyers told the court.