Civil Rights Groups Respond to Flawed Trial Court Opinion on New York Voting Rights Act

Whether congressional elections in Missouri for the November 2026 midterms will be held using districts that never lawfully took effect because they have not been subject to a vote by the people via the referendum process.

BOSTON – The First Circuit Court of Appeals today kept in place through the Nov. 3 election a preliminary injunction blocking the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) from enforcing key parts of a new rule that would significantly interfere with mail voting if implemented.The Trump administration has also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the injunction. A ruling is expected soon. In issuing the injunction, the U.S. District Court in Boston found that the USPS rule was likely unconstitutional and unlawful — and that enforcing it would make voter disenfranchisement “practically inevitable.” The First Circuit Court of Appeals reinforced the District Court’s findings, writing: “[T]he district court made detailed findings about the chaos and widespread disenfranchisement that would occur between now and November 3 should the [USPS] Rule take immediate effect, including the fact that it would be impossible for some States to reprint compliant envelopes; the likely delays in the required USPS envelope review process; the lack of a presently operative portal; and the herculean task that would confront the USPS in scanning tens of millions of ballot envelopes and reviewing for a match with information in the presently non-operative portal." The injunction stems from a lawsuit filed by a coalition of nonpartisan voter service and civic organizations: the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, League of Women Voters, Association of Americans Resident Overseas, U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, Legal Defense Fund (LDF), Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC (Advancing Justice – AAJC), and LatinoJustice PRLDEF. Plaintiffs and counsel jointly issued the following statement: “The U.S. Postal Service is not the gatekeeper for mail ballots. It does not have that authority. And it cannot usurp election authority from the states and Congress. This decision rightly keeps in place an order blocking USPS from enforcing its disruptive and disenfranchising rule through the November election and preserves the current system, which has worked safely, securely, and reliably for decades.”

Preliminary injunction bars USPS from enforcing a rule that would have made voter disenfranchisement “practically inevitable” BOSTON – A federal district court today issued a preliminary injunction blocking the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) from enforcing key parts of a rule that would have operationalized President Trump’s March 31 executive order restricting mail voting. Under the rule, the postal service would have refused to deliver mail ballots to certain voters. The court found that the rule was likely unconstitutional and unlawful — and that enforcing it would make voter disenfranchisement “practically inevitable.” The preliminary injunction blocks USPS from refusing to deliver ballots that do not comply with the many requirements in the rule, although it allows states to voluntarily comply with certain parts of it. The USPS rule requires states to follow specific guidelines for designing their mail ballot envelopes, create unique bar codes for every ballot, and upload an advance list of all mail voters to a new and untested federal portal, which is not yet operational. Dozens of state and local officials explained to the court in detail how it would be impossible to comply with the rule for the November elections, while only one state submitted a declaration that claimed it would “likely” be able to comply. In issuing the preliminary injunction, the court dissolved a temporary restraining order that the Trump administration had asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay. The administration’s motion to stay the temporary restraining order is now moot. The preliminary injunction is in place through the Nov. 3 election. In the ruling, the court recognized that plaintiffs and their members would suffer immediate and irreparable harm if the USPS rule were to be enforced: “Members are threatened with grave harm, namely disenfranchisement, if they do not receive a mail ballot from their local election official. This threat, moreover, is imminent.” The court noted that there is no evidence on record of fraud in mail ballots. The lawsuit was filed by a coalition of nonpartisan voter service and civic organizations: the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, League of Women Voters, Association of Americans Resident Overseas, U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, Legal Defense Fund (LDF), Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC (Advancing Justice – AAJC), and LatinoJustice PRLDEF. Plaintiffs and counsel jointly issued the following statement: “Today’s ruling makes it crystal clear: The U.S. Postal Service must deliver all election mail. USPS has no authority in the Constitution or federal law over how states administer mail voting. And the president cannot order the Postal Service to create a disruptive new bureaucracy that will throw the election into chaos and disenfranchise untold numbers of voters. “States are already beginning to send mail ballots to voters for the November election, and this preliminary injunction provides a critical protection from the chaos that this rule would unleash. “As the court noted, mail ballots have been used since the Civil War. Millions of citizens in the United States and overseas rely on mail ballots as a safe and trusted means of participating in our democracy. We will continue to defend the right of every eligible voter to cast their ballot freely and securely, including by mail.” The ruling is here.  

OXFORD, Miss. — Challengers of DeSoto County’s sole majority-Black judicial subdistrict filed a stipulation today to dismiss their own lawsuit after a federal judge rejected their effort to dismantle the district. Dismissal of the lawsuit, brought by DeSoto County Supervisor Robert Foster and others, preserves the only judicial subdistrict in the county that gives Black voters a meaningful opportunity to elect candidates of their choice in the November elections. The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Mississippi, Legal Defense Fund (LDF), and NAACP intervened last month in the case on behalf of the DeSoto County NAACP and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., to defend the majority-Black judicial subdistrict against Supervisor Foster’s challenge and stop the plaintiffs’ efforts to eliminate the district. “Dismissal of this misguided lawsuit is a victory for voters in DeSoto County and for voting rights and fair elections everywhere,” said Ming Cheung, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project. “Plaintiffs brought this case based on a misinterpretation of the law, and the court made clear that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act continues to protect Black voters from unlawful attempts to dilute their voting power.” “After failing to properly plead and present evidence on their claims, plaintiffs have decided to dismiss their case,” said Joshua Tom, legal director at ACLU of Mississippi. “All voters in Mississippi, including black residents of DeSoto County, should have the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.” “Black residents of DeSoto County have had to fight for fair representation far too many times,” said Sara Rohani, assistant counsel at the Legal Defense Fund. “We’re pleased that the sole judicial subdistrict giving Black communities a voice in their elections will remain in place this November. Dismissing this lawsuit protects not just Black voters, but all DeSoto voters — altering the judicial districts months after candidate qualifying would have sown confusion in the upcoming election.” “The NAACP Desoto County Branch is delighted to hear that the lawsuit has been dismissed,” said Pastor Robert Tipton, Jr., president of the DeSoto County NAACP. “However, we will remain in the fight for equality, equity, political, and social justice. We will also continue the fight against racism.” “Today’s dismissal is a victory for Black voters in DeSoto County and for the fundamental principle that every community deserves a meaningful voice in choosing those who administer justice,” said Cheryl W. Turner, international president of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. “This lawsuit sought to dismantle the county’s only majority-Black judicial subdistrict and silence voters just months before an election. Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., was proud to stand with the DeSoto County NAACP and our civil rights partners to defend fair representation. We will remain vigilant wherever voting power is threatened — and we will continue to organize, mobilize and litigate to protect it. DeSoto County is one of the fastest growing counties in Mississippi. Black residents make up approximately one-third of DeSoto County’s population, and the county has a longstanding pattern of racially polarized voting. Most judgeships in DeSoto County are elected countywide, meaning that without the majority-Black judicial subdistrict, Black voters would lack a meaningful opportunity to elect their preferred candidates to the circuit and chancery courts. The filing is online here.