Press Release: 9/9/2026

Markey Joins Padilla, Schumer, All Senate Democrats to Urge Supreme Court to Block Postal Service Rule Limiting Mail-In Voting

 

261 Members and former Members file bicameral, bipartisan brief as court order barring Postal Service rule limiting mail voting is being challenged by Trump’s DOJ 

Washington (September 8, 2026) — Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) today joined Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gary Peters (D-Mich.), along with Representative Joe Morelle (NY-25), Ranking Member of the Committee on House Administration, and Co-Chairs of the House Democrats’ Litigation Task Force Oversight Ranking Member Robert Garcia (CA-42), Assistant Leader Joe Neguse (CO-02), and Judiciary Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (MD-08), in leading a bicameral amicus brief challenging the legality of President Trump’s Executive Order and U.S. Postal Service rule seeking to exert control over mail-in ballots ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The amicus brief was also joined by the entire Senate Democratic Caucus.

The group, made up of a bipartisan, bicameral coalition of 261 lawmakers and former lawmakers, filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in the matter of State of California, et al. v. United States Postal Service, et al., a lawsuit brought by a coalition of State Attorneys General against the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). The court case challenges a final rule issued by the USPS pursuant to Trump’s directive that imposes unconstitutional and unworkable restrictions on mail-in voting, including requiring states to provide a “citizenship verification list” and attempting to give USPS control over who can vote by mail.

Nearly one-third of Americans have voted by mail in recent elections — a voting practice Trump himself used as recently as August 2026, when he voted in Florida’s Republican primary.

In the court filing, the amici curiae argue that Trump’s Executive Order 4399 and USPS’s final rule violate the separation of powers and usurp congressional authorities outlined in Article I of the U.S. Constitution, which gives the States and Congress exclusive authority over election administration.

“As current and former legislators, amici took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States — including its guarantee of the separation of powers,” wrote the lawmakers. “Amici have a particular interest in defending the institutional role of the Legislative Branch under Article I of the Constitution and in vindicating the long-settled principle that the Constitution commits ultimate regulatory authority over federal elections to Congress. The Constitution does not contemplate the Executive Branch acting unilaterally to assert power over federal elections. Yet that is what the Order and Final Rule do.”

The amici also pointed to a recent federal court ruling blocking the USPS from implementing its newly finalized mail ballot rule for the midterm elections, saying the agency lacked the authority to implement the rule and that its actions are “substantively unconstitutional and contrary to law.”

“The district court correctly concluded that Appellees are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that USPS lacked authority to issue the Final Rule, that the Final Rule unconstitutionally imposes mail-ballot requirements on the States, and that the Final Rule unconstitutionally bars non-compliant State and local election officials from using the USPS to mail ballots at all,” wrote the lawmakers.

The lawmakers concluded by asserting States’ power to administer elections and Congress’s power to make or alter rules regulating elections, which the Supreme Court itself has described as an “override” authority. Trump’s illegal incursion on this authority is an attempt to disenfranchise people who depend on mail-in ballots to vote.

“The integrity of our constitutional system depends on each branch keeping to its assigned role,” concluded the lawmakers. “The Framers set up a two-part system that gave the States default authority to regulate federal elections subject to Congress’s authority to override the States. The Framers did not provide the President with any authority to interfere in that system, nor has Congress subsequently imbued the President or the Executive Branch with any such authority by statute.”

The full brief is available here.