（Boston Orange綜合編譯）波士頓聯邦地方法院法官塔爾瓦尼（Indira Talwani）27日發布緊急臨時限制令，裁定美國郵政署（USPS）14天內「不得實施」郵寄投票新規，訂9月3日舉行聽證會。在距離11月期中選舉倒數不足70天且選務時間極度緊迫下，這項裁決等同宣告川普（Donald Trump）政府的新規已無法用於今年的大選。
這起緊急法律戰源於美國最高法院本週一（24日）以「原告過早提告」為由，暫緩了先前阻止川普3月行政命令的早期禁令。郵政署隨即於週三（26日）正式公佈實施新規，要求選票信封須印上獨特條碼並將選民名冊上傳至郵局電子系統，否則郵局將拒絕投遞。 對此，包括「麻州婦女選民聯盟（LWVMA）」、全美「婦女選民聯盟」、全美海外美籍人士協會（AARO）、美國投票基金會（U.S. Vote Foundation）等民權團體，在美國民權聯盟（ACLU）與紐約大學布倫南正義中心（Brennan Center）等律師團隊代理下，連同 24 個州與華盛頓特區組成的州檢察長聯盟，於新規發布當天（26日）緊急補充訴狀重新提告。白宮與郵政署則未立即回應置評請求。
原告團隊向法院強調，郵寄投票新規嚴重侵犯了憲法賦予各州與國會的管理選舉權限，不合法的強把審查角色加給郵局。塔爾瓦尼法官在裁決書中明確指出，案件記錄至今仍「完全缺乏任何關於郵寄投票存在詐欺的證據」；法官更直言：「郵政署欲透過很可能違憲的手段來修正未經證實的問題，其利益遠低於可能導致廣大公民喪失郵寄投票權的巨大風險。」
這項裁決揭示了新規對選務時間軸的致命衝擊。各州選票與信封早在8月初印製完畢，且依聯邦「軍人與海外公民不在場投票法（UOCAVA）」，各州必須在大選前45天（今年為9月19日前後）將選票寄給海外美軍與僑民，隨後於9月底寄給國內選民。在距離規定寄發日期不到一個月的情況下，印刷廠根本不可能重印數千萬份新信封，各州系統也無法在幾天內完成選民名冊對接。
選情分析人士指出，這份限制令雖然名義上僅凍結新規 14 天，但在選務運作已進入倒數日子階段，重印信封與系統測試技術上均需耗時數月，今年 11 月大選已確定完全無法採用該新規。全美約 30%，近 1 億張的郵寄選票，將確定繼續沿用現行規範正常投遞。
Federal Court Grants Emergency Relief Blocking USPS From Implementing Newly-Finalized Mail Ballot Rule For November Election
The temporary restraining order will remain in place for 14 days while the parties brief the pending motion for a preliminary injunction
BOSTON — This evening, a federal court granted voting rights organizations’ emergency request to block the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) from implementing the newly-finalized mail ballot rule for the November midterm elections. That rule would assign USPS an unprecedented and illegal gatekeeping role in the administration of mail voting, and jeopardize the delivery of mail-in ballots to many voters.
The plaintiffs in this case, League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, are 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, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC, and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.
In response to the Court’s order, counsel and plaintiffs released the following statement:
“The Administration previously dismissed plaintiffs’ ongoing harms from the executive order as speculative, but the newly finalized rule confirmed what plaintiffs have been saying all along. The Rule implements the Executive Order’s unprecedented attempt to usurp electoral authority from the states and Congress at the expense of voters. We welcome the court’s order, which recognized the immediate need to protect the entire electorate from the damaging impacts of this unlawful final rule in the lead up to November’s general elections. This is an important step towards affirming the public’s confidence in the system of mail ballots, which thousands of eligible voters nationwide rely on as a core method of democratic participation.”
On Aug. 11, 2026, the court issued an order in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, blocking USPS from implementing Section 3 of the executive order, regulating mail voting, for the upcoming Nov. 3 midterm elections. On Aug. 24, 2026, the Supreme Court stayed a different court order issued in the separate Trump v. California case blocking the implementation of the executive order, reasoning that it was premature for the California plaintiffs to bring that case before USPS issued a final rule implementing the order. On Aug. 26, 2026, the district court vacated the injunction in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts based on the Supreme Court’s stay decision, but allowed plaintiff organizations to amend their complaint to reflect the fact that USPS has now issued the final mail ballot rule. Plaintiff organizations then supplemented their original complaint to do exactly that, adding challenges to the newly finalized mail ballot rule and seeking immediate emergency relief on those claims.
In their papers, the plaintiff organizations argued that USPS’ newly-finalized mail ballot rule violates the Constitution’s separation of powers, which put the states and Congress in charge of election rules, not USPS or the president. The final rule also violates a number of the laws that govern how USPS operates. The plaintiffs sought emergency relief because these violations are causing irreparable harm to plaintiff organizations, their members, and the voters they serve each day that USPS is allowed to proceed with the new mail ballot rule, which is all the more severe as there are now fewer than 70 days before the November midterm elections.
Today, the court agreed that plaintiff organizations were likely to succeed in their claims that USPS lacked the authority to issue the final rule and that the final rule unconstitutionally imposed election requirements on the states. Noting that the “record continues to lack any evidence regarding fraudulent absentee or mail-in voting,” the Court emphasized, “USPS’s interest in correcting an unsubstantiated problem through likely unconstitutional means is dwarfed by the overwhelming risk of pervasive disenfranchisement of citizens who need access to mail ballots in order to vote.” In light of this immediate and irreparable harm, the Court granted emergency relief, ordering defendants to take no steps to prepare, implement, or enforce several sections of the final rule for 14 days. In the interim, the parties will fully brief the plaintiff organizations’ request for a preliminary injunction. A hearing on that motion has been set for Sept 3, 2026.
The order is available here: https://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/publication/lwvma-et-al-v-trump-memorandum-and-order-granting-part-plaintiffs-motions-temporary
沒有留言:
發佈留言