USPS Ignores Court Orders

The U.S. Postal Service published a ninety-five-page Final Rule, outlining its plan to restrict mail-in voting, on Friday, August 21. And it did so in an apparent violation of a federal court order.

The “Final Rule” implements Executive Order 14399, “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," signed by President Trump in March 2026. When implemented, the regulation will allow the U.S. Postal Service to decline from accepting mail ballots from states that have not followed specific rules for ballots of federal races.

The U.S. Postal Service’s August 21 instructions appear to conflict with two standing federal court orders.

Two Separate Court Cases

Two separate judges in separate cases placed separate injunctions upon the USPS instructions to move forward with Trump’s Executive Order 14399. In California v. Trump (D. Mass., June 25, 2026), Judge Denise Casper entered summary judgment for the plaintiff states and enjoined the Postal Service from, “implementing or giving effect to section 3 of Executive Order 14399” and from “completing rulemaking to promulgate the regulations as outlined in section 3 of that Executive Order.”

Separately, in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump (D. Mass., Aug. 11, 2026), Judge Indira Talwani issued a preliminary injunction barring Postmaster General David Steiner, by name, from “initiating or completing rule making to promulgate the specific regulations outlined in Section 3(b)(i)(v) or (d) of the EO”.

For the USPS Final Rule to be implemented, both court injunctions must be overturned.

The USPS acknowledges its Final Rule cannot yet be enacted. So why release it? In my opinion, USPS published the final text specifically so it would be ready to activate immediately if the courts including the Supreme Court, which is currently weighing one of the two injunctions, grant the federal government relief from both existing injunctions. The gap between "enforceable," and Election Day is the story, and it's worth walking through the time line.

One commentator has characterized the agency’s subsequent publication of the final rule as defiance of the court orders.

What the USPS Final Rule actually requires

Beneath the legal fight sits a very specific technical ask of the states by the USPS. Before the USPS accepts outgoing ballots from state election agencies, each State must submit three things per voter ame, address, and unique tracking barcodes, for both the outbound ballots and return envelopes. Once the State has done so, then and only then will it be allowed to use the soon to be created USPS "Federal Ballot Mail Portal”. The USPS is also requiring states to use specific envelope designs for outgoing ballots. Under the final rule, if a piece of mail does not meet these standards, USPS will reject the outgoing ballot and return it to the state for correction. The USPS will simply decline to accept the ballot into the mail system.

NOTE: The USPS's data requirements differ from the DOJ's requests. Unlike the DOJ, USPS does not ask states to submit voters' driver's license numbers or Social Security numbers. This is a notable pivot but not a retreat by the federal government. The DOJ's separate demand for that sensitive data remains active and unrelated to the USPS rule.

The USPS will then compile that data into a state-specific list and separately verify each outgoing ballot against it before accepting them. The consequence for noncompliance is narrow and severe. Postmaster General David Steiner told the Senate Homeland Security Committee in June that a state refusing to hand over its voter list would simply not have its ballots accepted into the postal system.

Asked directly whether USPS would deliver ballots regardless, Steiner answered, “Under our proposed regulation, no.”

Of note, Twenty-three states declined to turn over full voter data to the Department of Justice earlier this year, after the DOJ demanded voters driver's license numbers and Social Security numbers. The Postal Service's Federal Ballot Mail Portal will be a separate system with narrower requirements,. But any state engaged it the DOJ dispute would still need to complete a different USPS enrollment process to comply with the final rule. That is if the courts allow it to take effect for the 2026 general election.

The Supreme Court

The government asked the Supreme Court on July 27 to stay the California injunction and the briefing closed August 4. As of this writing, the Court has neither ruled nor granted the administrative stay the federal government requested. This unusually long silence has been flagged by observers of the Court as possibly the longest period the Supremes have ever taken on an election-law case. Justice Jackson, who fields emergency applications from the First Circuit, declined to freeze the injunction while the Court deliberates.

The Clock is Always Ticking in San Dimas

Even a ruling favorable to the federal government would not, by itself, put the Final Rule into effect for the November 2026 election. Three additional events would still have to happen:

1. The Privacy Act system of records must activate. This cannot be initiated until both court injunctions are lifted. Whether or not the USPS is pushing forward with this behind the scenes is uncertain.

2. The Portal must be built, tested, and deployed. That is a tall order and as far as we know as of this rule’s publication, the Portal exists only on paper. The Bipartisan Policy Center told USPS, in its own comment letter, that deploying a functioning portal before October 4 would be “an enormous undertaking,” even under ideal conditions.

3. Every state must complete onboarding and prepare its voter data. Voters’ names and addresses will need to be uploaded to the Portal. Envelopes will need to be designed to USPS specifications and certified as correct. Barcodes for both outgoing and incoming ballots, for every voter in a state’s file, will need to be created and uploaded to the Portal.

Every state will be required to complete each of these steps before its own mailing deadline. For Washington State, it is October 16, and the clock is ticking.

Derek Muller, an election law scholar at Notre Dame, put it plainly to reporters: “I think everyone agrees that it’s not going to be implemented for 2026. The logistics are so horrific.”

But if the USPS isn’t planning on implementing the Rule this year, why the August 21 announcement?

Washington State

Within its Final Rule the USPS abrogates any and all responsibility to states that rely on it for mail-in voting.

“States do not have to use the US Mail to conduct their elections.” -USPS, August 21, 2026

Washington State becomes a useful test case for what’s at stake. The state conducts elections by mail. Every one of its roughly 5.25 million registered voters receives a ballot by mail. State law requires ballots to go out no later than eighteen days before the election. This puts Washington’s real deadline for outgoing ballots at October 16. Earlier this year, Washington refused to hand its full voter file over to the Department of Justice in a different but similar dispute. The state provided only the publicly available version, (without driver license data and social security numbers), citing a 2026 state law that makes it a felony for officials to disclose protected voter data. The Portal’s own data demands (name, address, and envelope barcodes) are narrower than what the DOJ has asked for and don’t appear to conflict with state law. Compliance itself may not be the obstacle but timing could be a problem.

Secretary of State Steve Hobbs told USPS directly, in a June comment letter, that “the observed operational realities of the USPS” gave his office little confidence the agency could execute a change of this scale on this timeline. Hobbs warned that a botched rollout would effect the state and local races on the same ballot, not just the federal contests the Executive Order addresses. If the rule activates too late for Washington State to onboard in time, the state’s existing infrastructure (ballot drop boxes, in-person voting centers, replacement-ballot requests) would have to make up for what the USPS abandons.

The Bottom Line

This is not, strictly, a story about whether Trump’s executive order is lawful. Not surprisingly, the Supreme Court has so far avoided answering that question directly. One legal commentator has already argued that the Federal Government by publishing the USPS Final Rule defied a judge’s order.

Trump’s opposition to mail-in voting predates this year’s executive order. He has repeatedly and falsely claimed that mail voting is fraudulent and blamed it for his 2020 loss to Joe Biden, though a 2025 Brookings Institution study found only about four cases of fraud per ten million mail ballots cast.

This summer, during an appearance at a General Motors facility in Michigan, the same day the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to lift the injunction discussed above, Trump told reporters,

“And hopefully there will be no mail-in ballots,” calling the ballots “inherently corrupt.”

Earlier in 2026, at the House Republicans’ issues conference in Doral, Florida, he was more explicit about the political stakes, telling lawmakers that passing his voter ID and mail-ballot legislation would,

(Trump), “guarantee the midterms” for Republicans, adding a warning: “If you don’t get it, big trouble.”

Trump’s own words suggest political motives behind his unsubstantiated voter fraud narrative. Whether the resulting delay and uncertainty end up influencing the November midterms remain to be seen. What is imperative for voters, who do not want to be disenfranchised by the Trump administration, is that they create a back up plan for casting their ballots in the upcoming 2026 election.

References and Additional Reading

The Postal Service Defied a Judge's Order on Ballots

USPS Final Rule

Federal Register — Executive Order 14399, “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections”

Associated Press (via Yahoo News) — “Trump administration urges Supreme Court to allow order targeting mail-in voting before midterms”

California Attorney General — Multistate comment letter to USPS (quoting Judge Casper’s injunction)

California Attorney General — Press release announcing the lawsuit (Bonta)

Supreme Court of the United States — Trump v. California, stay application (No. 26A)

Supreme Court of the United States — Trump v. California, supplemental stay brief No 26A124

Narativ — “The Postal Service Defied a Judge’s Order on Ballots”

Washington Secretary of State — Steve Hobbs’s comments on the USPS proposed ballot rule

Bipartisan Policy Center — Public comment on USPS proposed rule (Docket 2026-10968)

Votebeat — “Trump wants the Supreme Court to let him put new restrictions on mail ballots in the midterms, but time is growing short”

Brookings Institution — “Mail voting in the US: Data points to very low fraud and significant benefits to voters” (Samara Angel, Jonathan Katz, Randi Wright, November 6, 2025)

Senate Democratic Leadership — Transcript, “President Trump Addresses the Republican Members Issues Conference in Florida,” March 9, 2026

The Hill — “Donald Trump tells House Republicans: SAVE America Act will “guarantee the midterms’”

Wikipedia — Executive Order 14399

Wikipedia — Denise J. Casper

The Math Behind the Announcement

The US 10- year bond is an important benchmark for mortgage lenders and investors. When the 10-year yield increases, mortgage rates go-up and the stock market frequently retreats. This week’s Treasury buyback action will increase liquidity in the long term bond market with the hope that it might bring down the yield on the US ten-year bond. As a physician, I think of it like giving a patient, (the US economy), a shot of steroids, (liquidity), with the goal of making them feel better in the short run. A decrease in short term interest rates MIGHT give a brief pause to mortgage interest rates and a bump to an already bull stock market. The operative word here is “MIGHT” because nobody knows for sure what could happen.

Will the buyback “stabilize” markets like Bessent is predicting? Or will it release the inflation genie from the bottle?

Before declaring Bessent an economic genius, let’s take a look at what precisely was announced. The US Treasury’s quarterly statement, issued just two weeks before the buyback announcement, had already scheduled $111 billion in gross issuance of new 20- and 30-year bonds for the quarter. Additionally, that statement had already included a previously planned schedule of modest buybacks.

Wednesday’s announcement did not alter issuance. It merely increased the amount of the buyback purchases, and by a comparatively small amount. The chart below compares the original plan to the new announcement.

Compared to the $32.2 trillion of outstanding US debt, an additional $14 billion of additional liquidity support is not very significant.

The Treasury’s Actions Coincide with the Midterm Elections

The 2026 US midterm elections, scheduled for November 3, are of enormous consequence to the Trump administration as they can determine the control of the US Congress. In an administration where every action taken is for the benefit of the President, the effective window for the Treasury action, September 9 through November 4, is suspicious.

One senior analyst at DZ Bank offered the plainest explanation on record: “It’s only three months until the midterm elections.”

This does not prove that Bessent is doing the buyback to improve the outcome for MAGA candidates. Since this is a change from what was announced two weeks ago, we now know that the Treasury chose to intervene. It acted at the precise time when rising borrowing costs, would be most politically costly to the President.

A Cabinet member who wished to avoid the appearance of political motivation might have chosen to be silent. Bessent chose the opposite, announcing on CNBC that the buyback would exceed even the double figure and that his department intended to “make a market” in the affected securities.

An Unpredictable Instrument

Bessent described the buyback as a “signaling,” a term that might have intended to reassure but it to markets it is equally troubling. Signals depend on the credibility of the signaler and the receptivity of the audience. The Treasury is losing both.

The first day of the intervention illustrated the problem. Bond yields fell briefly, then resumed their climb, while market-based inflation expectations, rose to their highest levels in more than two months.

An operation meant to calm markets appears, instead, to have spooked investors that the government is worried enough to intervene.

This is the central risk of using macro economic operations to influence political outcomes. These maneuvers have momentum and their effects are not fully predictable. A buyback large enough to move markets meaningfully would also be large enough to raise legitimate questions about debt monetization. A buyback too small to move markets, risks little except the Treasury secretary’s credibility the next time he claims to be acting on “fundamentals” rather than politics.

Bond Vigilantes Are Watching

Investors known as “bond vigilantes” for their habit of punishing profligate governments will not be fooled because the Scott Bessent used serious words like “equilibrium” and “fundamentals.” Bond markets recognize debt monetization when they see it and there is still one avoidable elephant in the room.

The US debt crossed $40 trillion this week.

Annual interest payments on the US debt now exceed $1 trillion, trailing only Social Security as a federal expense. In response to the Treasury’s announcement, investor Ray Dalio, among others, has already characterized the buyback as one indicator among others, (Japan’s reduced appetite for US Treasuries and increasing long-term yields), that a genuine US debt reckoning is drawing closer.

A $14 billion liquidity reshuffle does not resolve the deficit. It does not change the math of an aging population drawing on Social Security and Medicare while revenues continue to fall short of spending. Global bond markets, unlike American voters, do not ignore macro economics because of an administration’s political rhetoric. Whatever strategy the Treasury buyback offers the administration during the election run-up, the world’s largest bond market has its own calendar and it does not end on November 3.

References and Additional Reading

Here is a summary of the sources drawn upon to write the draft article:

References

1. Hawaii Tribune, Reuters (David Lawder and Tatiana Bautzer, Aug. 19, 2026) , “Treasury Secretary Bessent doubles US long-bond buybacks in the face of surging yields.”

2. Financial Times Alphaville (Toby Nangle, Aug. 20, 2026) ,“The US Treasury is buying long bonds, but not very many.”

3. CNBC (Jeff Cox, Aug. 20 and Aug. 21, 2026)

4. CNBC (Alex Harring, Aug. 21, 2026)

5. Hawaii News Network/ew York Times (Alan Rappeport and Colby Smith, Aug. 20, 2026)

6. NPR (Scott Horsley, Aug. 20, 2026)

Marketed as an anti-establishment, working-class alternative to the status quo, Powell’s campaign created a highly choreographed political illusion. A well-respected Progre…

Read more

Read more

When a late-May poll from Tavern Research landed in Eastern Washington claiming that Independent candidate Nate Powell led Republican incumbent Representative Michael Baumgartner by 6 points (53% to 47%), it raised some questions across Washington’s 5th Congressional District. How could a non-party candidate polling at just 4% in the no…

Read more

Read more

Right now, voters have a historic moment to step up and make things happen. Because while other WA-05 candidates are trying to convince you that they can lead, David has already spent nearly three decades proving what high-octane leadership looks like. This is a man constantly in mo…

Read more

Read more

Read more

Just in Time for Independence Day - A Foreign Prince gifts Trump a 747 and the Taxpayer pays for the Uprade

On July 1, 2026, a gleaming Boeing 747 with a fresh paint job and carrying the Orange Cockwamble, touched down in North Dakota at the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library. Spectators cringed at the cognitive dissonance becaus…

Read more

The Fourth of July and King George’s Ghost

I’ve heard plenty of people say they don’t feel like celebrating our nation’s birthday this weekend. After 18 months of the Trump administration curtailing individual freedoms and taking a dump on the Constitution, it feels less like a birthday and more like we’re preparing for ou…

Read more

For decades, the mainstream anti-abortion movement relied on a carefully crafted rhetorical strategy: punish the provider, protect the patient. Women who terminated their pregnancies were framed by pro-life strategists as victims of a predatory medical industry, while the doctors performing the procedures were cast as the tr…

Read more

Read more

Today, June 19th, marks Juneteenth—a day of profound historical weight and celebration. The holiday traces its origins back to June 19, 1865, when Union Major General Gordon Granger arrived in Galveston, Texas. Though Presid…

Read more

Our Commander-in-Chief loves to brag about winning. He wins “bigly,” he wins “like nobody’s ever seen before.” But over the last few days, his tightly constructed illusion of ultimate dominance ran directly into a terrifying, immovable wall. And by “wall,” I mean three highly educated wome…

Read more

Read more

On the afternoon of June 2, 2026, a vital alarm was sounded from within the American scientific establishment. Stand Up for Science , an organization committed to defending Science in America, hosted a virtual Emergency Science Meeting. The event drew over 2,400 leading scientists, Nobel laureates, university leaders, and elected o…

Read more

Read more

The president first made that statement on February 19, 2026, and then repeated it on February 27, March 9, and April 16. He gave his most heartfelt performance during a White House Mother’s Day event on May 8 when Trump gushed over billionaire founders Michael and Susan Dell for their $6.25 billion contribution to his administ…

Read more

There is a blood-soaked rule of international espionage and high-stakes diplomacy that the clueless Trump administration seems to have forgotten: In a totalitarian state, absolutely nothing is accidental. Every camera angle, every specific shade of fabric, and every single human face permitted within striking distance of a visiting world leader has bee…

Read more