Politics

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump defended his proposal to give Americans a $5,000 “dividend” — which some dismissed as a stunt or bribe — seeming to suggest it as a “reward” for voters who he says endured the Biden administration.

The comments came in response to ABC News pressing him on why he would need to offer such a payment if his economic policies are working.

Trump was asked on the tarmac on his way back to Washington, D.C. — after he closed out night two of the Republican Midterm Convention in Dallas — whether the proposed payment amounted to an incentive for voters to turn out in the midterm elections.

The proposed payment to all American adults — which some estimated would cost $1.3 trillion — was conditioned on Republicans retaining control of both houses of Congress in the midterms and the money being spent in the U.S.

The White House issued a press release on Thursday that suggests the checks could come from commitments the Trump administration has received from companies to invest in the private sector. It’s unclear how those investments, which have not yet materialized, would be made into dividend checks for Americans.

“The U.S. is still $40 trillion in debt, if your economic policies are working, why do you need an incentive for people to turn out to vote?” ABC News asked the president directly.

Trump rejected the premise that the payment was intended to encourage voter turnout.

“I think what you’re going to do — I didn’t do it for turning out the vote, I did it as a reward for people having to put up with five years-four years of horrible situation caused by Biden,” Trump said.

Trump then pointed to what he described as problems with the Biden administration’s economic and immigration policies.

“I mean, they had to put up with the four years, and they carried on for at least a half an additional year with horrible, just a horrible thing that Biden did to our country,” Trump said. “And that’s not only just from an economic standpoint. You look at the border, you look at the crime, and now we’ve got it under control.”

“But what, what a period of time,” Trump continued. “It’s almost a reward for the people having to put up with Biden’s policy.”

Trump has said the proposed $5,000 payments would be funded through what he has described as “tremendous growth.”

“We have tremendous growth. We have growth like no country has ever seen before,” Trump said. “We have trillions of dollars coming in, and that will end up being not a very big problem at all.”

Many members of Congress have expressed opposition to Trump’s plan, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer slamming the move.

“Trump’s presidency is so failed and broken, he is resorting to trying to bribe the American people for their votes,” Schumer wrote in a social media post.

Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu, who serves as the vice chairman of the House Democratic caucus, joked in a social media post that “If Democrats flip the House and Senate everyone will get a $10,000 dividend, and a pony, and free ice cream for life.”

Outgoing Republican Rep. Thomas Massie said he fears the payments would cause more inflation and accused Trump of trying to buy votes.

“Frankly, I’m insulted by the notion that my vote this November could be bought for 5k,” Massie wrote in a post on X.

Just last year, the president declared that every American would get a $2,000 rebate check paid for by tariff revenue.

“A dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high income people!) will be paid to everyone,” he wrote on his social media platform in November 2025. That has not happened yet.

Even the most generous accounting, such as Penn Wharton’s Budget Model, estimates the tariffs brought in roughly $300 billion. And that’s not counting the money the Treasury has had to pay back to American companies after the Supreme Court ruled Trump’s tariff regime illegal. As a result of those debts, the government is currently paying out more in tariff revenue than it is collecting.

ABC News’ Justin Fishel and Sarah Beth Hensley contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court has blocked Missouri Republicans from moving forward with a U.S. House map that the state’s highest court had already invalidated ahead of the November election.

In a brief unexplained order, and over no noted dissent by any justices, the court granted a request by a Democrat-backed advocacy group to pause a lower federal court order that greenlit the GOP-favored map just days ago. 

The decision likely ends the legal whiplash over Missouri’s map two months before the high-stakes midterm election takes place. It also hands Democrats a small victory in the nationwide mid-decade redistricting war.

State Republicans could still technically attempt to ask the justices to take the case for oral argument and decide the merits, but that process would very likely exceed the time left before the vote — and the Democratic-favored map would remain in effect in the meantime, the order indicated.

State election officials will now bear the brunt of having to quickly lay groundwork for administering the vote with a district map different from the one used in the primary.

The group that sought to preserve the 2022 map calls this the “definitive answer” in Missouri for November.

“The law is the law, the Missouri constitution is clear as was the Missouri Supreme Court,” Richard von Glahn, executive director of the group pushing the referendum vote, People Not Politicians, said in a statement. “Over 305,000 Missouri voters — Republicans, Democrats and Independents took action to block this political power grab last fall. People, not politicians, will have the final say when they vote NO on Proposition A this November.”

The state’s Republican-controlled legislature last year passed into law a new congressional map that redrew the district currently held by Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver to lean Republican as part of a nationwide mid-decade redistricting push encouraged by President Donald Trump.

But Democrats and other opponents of the new map filed legal challenges, pushing for a ballot initiative to put the new map up for a vote in November. They also argued that if the new map was put up for a referendum vote in November, that would suspend the law establishing the new map unless voters approved it and that Missouri’s elections should be held under the state’s older congressional map.

Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins initially decided in early August that he would not certify the referendum to the ballot, saying he had determined it was unconstitutional. People Not Politicians successfully appealed that ruling to the state Supreme Court, which ruled to block the new map from being used in November and to allow the ballot initiative to proceed.

Republicans appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking intervention as they simultaneously pursued a second-track legal front. 

Just days ago, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who oversees Missouri federal courts, declined to intervene in the dispute over Missouri’s congressional map.

Earlier this month, a federal district court judge directed the state to use the GOP-favored map, which was used in the primary, even though the state’s highest court directed the opposite.

Missouri Republicans had pushed back against a change to the map, saying in a court filing that a change-up at this late hour would “disenfranchise millions of primary voters” and “unilaterally void a congressional map before a statewide vote.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he would give American adults a $5,000 “dividend” if Republicans kept the House and Senate in the midterm elections this fall, marking at least the second time he’s promised to use tariff revenue to send payments to Americans.

“Because of our tremendous strength and success economically, I will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000,” Trump said, likening it to what “a successful company will do a cash distribution to its shareholders.”

ABC News has reached out to the White House for further details.

The president’s claim, which came during his speech on the first night of the GOP’s midterm convention, followed a promise he made last year to use tariff revenue to give Americans a $2,000 “dividend.”

Ten months later, those previously promised returns have yet to materialize. 

“People that are against Tariffs are FOOLS!” Trump posted on Nov. 9, 2025, on his social media network, before adding, “A dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high income people!) will be paid to everyone.”

The next day, Trump doubled down. 

“And one of the things we’re going to do, we’re going to issue a dividend to our middle-income people and lower income people of about $2,000,” the president said at the time. “And we’re going to use the remaining tariffs to lower our debt.”

White House officials were exploring ways to execute the plan put forward by Trump, then-press secretary Karoline Leavitt said at the time, but she did not provide details about specific options.

“The president made it clear he wants to make it happen,” Leavitt told reporters at the White House. “So his team of economic advisers are looking into it.”

ABC News has reached out to the White House for comment on the $2,000 “dividend.”

A “dividend” typically describes a payout to individual shareholders, funded by a company’s profits. Trump as he announced the $2,000 “dividend” said they would be coming at a time of prosperity, touting in his post that U.S. stock markets were near all-time highs and there had been a “record” investment in the U.S. He said that “plants and factories going up all over the place.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos at the time that the $2,000 dividend “could be just the tax decreases that we are seeing on the president’s agenda — you know, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security, deductibility of auto loans.”

He said the “dividend” may come “in lots of forms.”

If Trump’s proposals came in the form of a one-time payout to Americans, they could be similar to the three stimulus checks mailed to Americans during the pandemic, two of which were authorized by Trump.

Those three payments totaled as much as $3,200 per tax filer, as well as $2,500 per child, according to the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, a watchdog established by Congress.

Trump said in his speech on Wednesday that at least some of that $5,000 would be expected to come from tariff revenue, though the mechanism and legality of delivering on that promise are unclear.

Not only did the $2,000 “dividend” payments never come for Americans — but much of the revenue collected by the government from Trump’s tariffs had to be paid back to the companies.

The Trump administration paid out a milestone $100 billion in tariff refunds through the end of July, according to an August court filing. That was more than half of the $166 billion owed to thousands of American businesses who paid the tariffs that were later struck down by the Supreme Court.

Trump added on Wednesday that the only condition attached to the proposed “dividend” would be that the distributed money must be spent in the U.S.

ABC News’ Max Zahn contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump doled out gifts totaling $155,000 for the holidays to four staff members in 2025, according to personal financial disclosures from the aides published by the White House.

The president gave $45,000 each to Natalie Harp, Margo Martin and Chamberlain Harris as “cash gift[s] for the holidays,” gifts that appear to be personal, according to documents the White House made public this month.

Walt Nauta, a longtime ally of Trump’s, received a $20,000 holiday gift, according to the documents.

The aides received the gifts in addition to their six-figure salaries. Harp, the president’s executive assistant, makes $150,000 annually, according to the White House. Martin and Harris, the president’s communication adviser and deputy director of Oval Office operations, respectively, make the same. Nauta, the director of Oval Office operations, makes $175,000 a year.

“The President has a longstanding practice of giving Christmas gifts to people in his orbit, including at times employees and aides, both in government and in his time in the private sector,” a White House official said in a statement to ABC News. “The gifts at issue here have nothing to do with any of these individuals’ official government duties, and therefore are entirely permissible under relevant legal and ethical standards.”

Harp, who is often seen with the president, has come under scrutiny from Democrats on the midterm campaign trail. Georgia Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff invoked her name during a rally in August, telling a crowd Trump “wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the Emir of Qatar.”

Trump is expected to fly aboard the new Air Force One gifted to the U.S. by Qatar when he travels to Ireland this week, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News, marking his first foreign trip on the jet since he secretly switched planes in July while leaving a NATO summit in Turkey amid threats against him from Iran. The president previously said the plane would be updated in October.

Asked to respond to Ossoff’s remark in the Oval Office the next day, Trump said that he “would much rather do other things,” before veering into various renovation projects at the White House.

Martin and Nauta are also close to the president. Nauta, Trump’s valet during the first term, was charged alongside Trump in the special counsel investigation into Trump’s alleged taking of classified information. Martin has been a longtime staffer for Trump, dating back to his first administration, and later joined his 2024 campaign. She has been a key social media conduit for Trump, often capturing and posting up-close and behind-the-scenes content of him engaged in his duties.

Harris also served under the first Trump administration and continued working for the president in Florida after he left office. She returned to Washington to work under the second administration and was appointed to the Commission of Fine Arts earlier this year.

The documents don’t include dates detailing when the gifts were given, aside from describing them as “for the holidays.” They appear to be personal gifts and in three cases list the president’s Palm Beach address.

Trump released his own financial disclosure back in June showing that he made a record amount of income for an American president, drawing in over $2.2 billion, including over $1.4 billion from various crypto ventures.

Back in July, another White House staffer’s finances came under public scrutiny after ABC News reported that Trump’s longtime teleprompter operator, Gabriel Perez, made more than $100,000 on Kalshi’s so-called “mention markets,” according to regulators. Perez was placed on unpaid administrative leave and later fired.

According to sources, Kalshi alerted its regulator, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), to the suspicious activity on its “Mentions” market, where users can bet on whether specific words, phrases or topics are uttered during a public speech. 

Perez made $175,000 per year in his role, according to the White House.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro vented frustration at reporters on Wednesday as she repeatedly refused to answer questions about a topic that has landed her in hot water with President Donald Trump: his demands that she revisit the now-dismissed Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool vandalism case against former Olympian David Hearn.

In a news conference involving an unrelated crackdown targeting Chinese scam centers, Pirro interrupted reporters in at least three exchanges as soon as they mentioned Hearn’s case.

Asked by ABC News if she plans to revisit the Reflecting Pool case against Hearn per Trump’s request, Pirro interrupted: “Ah — why did I know that was coming?”

“President Trump has made clear that this is very important to him,” ABC News responded.

“And you know the president has the right to decide what he wants to do and what is important,” Pirro replied.

When another reporter later followed up and attempted to ask about Hearn’s case, Pirro again interrupted, “No, I’m not going there! Don’t even go there.”

At one point, after a reporter made another final attempt, Pirro yelled, “No! No and no! … How many times do I have to say no?!” 

Pirro’s news conference is the first since her surprise move to dismiss the felony indictment against Hearn in August. In a filing, Pirro admitted that damage to the Reflecting Pool was likely caused by “botched” installation and not by vandals. 

The move prompted outrage from Trump, who said Pirro “choked” in her handling of the case, and later refused to rule out firing Pirro who he urged to “re-visit” the decision to charge Hearn.

“U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro should re-visit her hastily made decision [to dismiss Hearn’s indictment],” Trump wrote in an Aug. 7 post on social media.

The judge who previously oversaw Hearn’s case is currently weighing whether to dismiss the case “with prejudice,” which would effectively bar prosecutors from seeking another indictment against Hearn.

Hearn’s attorneys have said that Trump is still pushing a “false version” of the events around the Reflecting Pool, bolstering their argument that the government should be blocked from pursuing charges again.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — An inflatable slide deployed on President Donald Trump’s Qatari-gifted Air Force One at Joint Base Andrews on Wednesday afternoon before he was set to board it to head to the Republican Midterm Convention in Dallas, Texas.

Trump appeared to indicate that the emergency slide was deployed intentionally as he waited for about 20 minutes inside Marine One on the tarmac.

“They’re checking the slide over here. And I think it’s gonna take 15 minutes. They were doing a check on the slide, you know, the emergency — so I think it takes about 15 minutes,” Trump told reporters, before adding that it was safe to fly on.

Asked by ABC News why the slide was being checked and if there was a security concern, Trump said they just want to make sure it “works perfectly.” Slides are not typically checked by deploying them before departure as it is a time-consuming process to remove and replace them once they are deployed.

Asked if he was sure the plane was safe to fly, Trump said he was confident that it was. 

“Yeah, I am, or I wouldn’t be on it,” Trump said.

The president is set to deliver the keynote address on Wednesday night at the Republicans’ first-ever midterm convention.

The White House referred back the president’s comments when asked about the slide’s deployment.

The slide was later pulled off of the plane and hauled away on the back of a pick-up truck before the plane took off for Dallas.

Trump’s old Air Force One pulled up behind the new jet as a back-up option.

The newly retrofitted Air Force One, a gift from the Qatari royal family worth $400 million, has raised questions from some lawmakers and ethics experts over the unprecedented foreign gift.

Earlier this year, Trump called the jet, which is approximately 14 years old, “the world’s most luxurious plane.” Trump told reporters in July that the plane was going to be “maxed out” — a process that would happen “in about a month or so” he said.

Also in July, Trump secretly switched planes — using a catering food truck and a military aircraft, sources told ABC News — while leaving a NATO summit in Turkey amid threats against him from Iran.

ABC News’ Sam Sweeney and Sarah Beth Hensley contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump has escalated his economic pressure against Canada following its retaliatory tariffs against the U.S., issuing a series of proclamations Tuesday night to ban certain Canadian alcohol, dairy products and motorcycles from entering America, and imposing his 50% tariff on more goods.   

The ban on the importation of some alcohol, dairy, motorcycles and mopeds would take effect on Sept. 29. at 12:01 a.m. ET.

“President Trump is doing this to make sure again that we keep a level playing field, deter retaliation, and of course protect American production,” a senior White House official told reporters. 

The ban covers sparkling grape wine, malt beer, rice wine or sake, Irish and Scotch whiskies, and pisco and singani – as long as they are packaged. Other types of alcoholic beverages that are banned include tequila and mezcal if they are in containers under four liters.

The dairy now prohibited from entering the U.S. from Canada include multiple types of whey protein. Other products include cane molasses and non-alcoholic beer.

Additionally, Trump is subjecting an additional list of goods to his 50% tariffs, including golf carts and similar motor vehicles, cotton mattresses, bamboo and rattan furniture and additional types of aluminum and cheese products, according to the proclamation.

The president is, however, also removing several Canadian goods from the 50% tariffs, including non-white cement, toilet and face tissue, bed sheets and other household and hospital articles made of paper pulp, fishing rods and their accessories, chemically pure sugars and road salt.

The senior official defended the removal of these products from the tariff list saying Trump “has taken a lot more nuance when it comes to naturally occurring items or natural resources not available” in the U.S., pointing to the rock salts as an example. 

“There’s a region of the country that relies on rock salt from Canada in those mines, and it’s not easily replaced,” the senior official said. 

The updates to the list of goods being tariffed will go into effect in “one week,” the official said.  

In another move in response to Canada’s retaliatory tariffs on Tuesday, Trump directed the U.S. General Services Administration and the U.S. Trade Representative to ban Canada from U.S. government procurement markets through which the government buys foreign goods. 

“I am hereby directing the GSA, working with the USTR, to take all necessary steps to REMOVE Canadian-origin products from GSA’s Multiple Award Schedules unless Canada restores full and fair reciprocity for American Farmers and Companies,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “Those schedules account for more than 50 BILLION DOLLARS a year.” 

It’s unclear how long it would take to remove Canadian products from U.S. government purchasing contracts.

ABC News has reached out to the White House and the GSA for comment. 

The senior official said Trump’s plans to impose 50% tariffs on Canadian autos on Jan. 1 remains, but that it’s possible the warring sides can reach an agreement. 

“Whether we can find alternative resolutions at the table, I would say, I mean, yes, that’s always a possibility,” the senior official said. “I think there’s interest on the Canadian side in finding an alternative pathway, and as always, we remain– we remain open,” they later added. 

In response to the latest move by the White House, Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc said Canada is assessing the measures.

“As has been the case for 18 months, our absolute priority remains to protect and support Canadian workers, farmers, families, and businesses in the face of these unjustified measures,” LeBlanc said in a statement.

“When the United States is ready to engage in dialogue, our government will work in good faith and constructively toward establishing safer and mutually beneficial trade relations that fully respect Canadian sovereignty,” the statement concluded.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A federal appeals court in Louisiana could decide whether patients in the U.S. can continue to access the abortion drug mifepristone by mail and at pharmacies.

The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans began hearing oral arguments on Wednesday as Louisiana attempts to roll back a Biden-era policy around the way mifepristone is dispensed.

In January 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced it was permanently lifting its restriction that mifepristone had to be dispensed in person, allowing certified retail and mail-order pharmacies to dispense the medication as well.

Louisiana, however, has argued that government regulators acted arbitrarily without proper consideration of health risks. The state has also argued the rule change violated the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision that overturned Roe v. Wade by allowing abortion pills to be administered by telehealth and by mail in states with abortion bans, including Louisiana.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the state in May, barring dispensation of mifepristone by telehealth providers and by pharmacies or mail, but the Supreme Court preserved access to the pill, keeping the lower court’s order on hold.

The Center for Reproductive Rights said in a press release the case will likely go back to the Supreme Court for a final ruling until it’s “decided on the merits.”

Abortion rights groups have argued that reinstating an in-person requirement would create a barrier for pregnant patients, many of whom live far from a clinic.

“This case isn’t just about Louisiana — it could make it much harder to get abortion pills in every state, from New York to California,” Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement. “Abortion pills and telehealth have been a game-changer for women since Roe v. Wade was overturned, and that is exactly why the anti-abortion movement is going after them.”

She went on, “This is not simply about convenience — for many people, telehealth could be the difference between getting an abortion and not. Whether a doctor sends it to you via mail or hands it to you in their office, mifepristone is safe and effective. There is no scientific reason to restrict it.”

The court date comes two years after the Supreme Court unanimously rejected a similar legal challenge to mifepristone, concluding that the doctors and anti-abortion groups who sued over the drug did not have standing.

Mifepristone is a drug typically used in combination with another drug, misoprostol, to induce an abortion or to help manage an early miscarriage.

The medication works by blocking progesterone, a hormone that the body needs to continue a pregnancy.

This causes the uterine lining to stop thickening and to break down, detaching the embryo. The second drug, misoprostol, taken 24 to 48 hours later, causes the uterus to contract and dilates the cervix, which will expel the embryo.

The FDA authorized mifepristone for medication abortion in September 2000 for up to seven weeks’ gestation, which was then extended to 10 weeks’ gestation in 2016.

However, the World Health Organization says the two drug-regimen can be taken up until the 12-week mark of pregnancy.

Medication abortion now accounts for more than 60% of all abortions in the U.S., according to the Guttmacher Institute.

In states with total bans, about 91,000 abortions were provided last year via telehealth, the Guttmacher Institute said.

ABC News’ Devin Dwyer contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump has posted numerous memes on social media over the long weekend appearing to propose renaming the state of New Mexico to “New America.”

The posts come as the president has repeatedly taken aim at bodies of water bearing the names of other countries and foreign provinces, including the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario, seeking to change those names to include “America” via executive orders.

The president can unilaterally change a geographic name for official U.S. federal government use, but he can’t dictate what other countries or international bodies call it. However, the president cannot unilaterally change the name of a state. New Mexico’s state constitution explicitly states: “The name of this state is New Mexico.”

Congress passed the Enabling Act of 1910, which authorized the territory of New Mexico to form a constitution and state government in preparation for admission to the Union. New Mexico officially became a state on Jan. 6, 1912.

While in Bedminster, New Jersey, Trump continued posting on social media Monday, including at least seven posts related to his proposal to rename New Mexico “New America,” drawing fierce backlash from the state’s leaders.

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham criticized Trump’s posts Sunday, saying in a post on X that the state’s name is not “up for debate.”

“It’s been ours since before the United States existed,” the governor said. “What is up for debate? Who’s showing up for working families. While the President tries to distract Americans from his disastrous war in Iran, gas prices keep soaring. Americans are also spending more at the grocery store, losing access to health care and wondering if they’ll ever be able to afford a home.”

“Under Democratic leadership here in New Mexico, we’re providing families with free childcare and college, protecting access to health care and investing in housing. While the White House wastes time coloring on maps, Nuevo México is busy doing the work,” the governor stated.

Both senators from New Mexico also responded to Trump’s posts Sunday.

“Three things I will always call by their actual names… The Gulf of Mexico Lake Ontario New Mexico,” Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico stated in a post on X.

Sen. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico also posted on X, “It’s New Mexico, always has been and always will be. Just like how you’ll always be a sinvergüenza and corrupt.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

The Trump administration on Sunday filed another emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to immediately implement new U.S. Postal Service mail ballot rules for November.

The application is not meaningfully different from the request the administration filed on Sept. 3, but comes in response to the federal judge handling the legal battle over new U.S. Postal Service mail ballot rules extending her block of the rules for the November midterm elections in an order issued on Friday, again finding them likely unlawful.

Judge Indira Talwani’s temporary order, which had been set to expire on Sept. 10, is now in place indefinitely unless the a higher court allows the Trump administration to put the rules into effect.

The judge found that immediate implementation of the rules this close to the November election, prompted by President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at tightening access to mail ballots, “threatens disenfranchisement of millions of United States citizens who seek to vote by mail.”

Talwani concluded that the rules, which mandate nationwide mail ballot design and review requirements and state submission of a voter information database to USPS, are “unconstitutional where it intrudes not only on Congress’s  Elections Clause powers but also that power left to the States.”

The decision ups the ante for the U.S. Supreme Court, which had already been asked to weigh in on Talwani’s preliminary injunction. A decision is expected as soon as the coming week.

Time is of the essence since some states have already begun mailing ballots for the fall election.

Trump, who has pushed unfounded claims of widespread mail ballot fraud, wants states to report to USPS basic voter information, such as a voter’s name and home address, attached to a unique barcode on every mail-in ballot distributed. Postal workers would then only deliver ballots addressed to voters who appear on the state-provided list.

Following the publication of the regulations last month, dozens of Democratic state attorneys general sued the Trump administration after an earlier lawsuit was blocked by the Supreme Court, which said at the time that the challenge was premature since the regulations hadn’t been finalized.

Judge Talwani wrote in her opinion Friday that the dispute was now ripe for judicial intervention.

“Nothing is hypothetical,” she said of the alleged harm to states, voters and voter advocacy groups ahead of the November election.

In its latest appeal to the justices, the Trump administration insisted the rules impose only “modest” ballot design and review requirements on states and that a requirement to submit name, address, and barcode information of intended recipients is not onerous or intrusive.

The states challenging the USPS rule have until Tuesday at 10 a.m. to formally respond before the Supreme Court makes a decision.

The states and voter advocacy groups have argued that the new USPS regulations are an attempt by the Trump administration to federalize elections, which are historically and constitutionally managed by each state, and make it harder to vote by mail for everyday citizens.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.