The Trump administration has renewed its request for the U.S. Supreme Court to review and set aside lower court orders blocking part of an executive order on mail-in voting in 23 states and the District of Columbia.

Just the News reports that the executive order, issued in March of this year, directs the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of eligible voters nationwide, on a state-by-state basis, and seeks to block the U.S. Postal Service from delivering absentee ballots to voters not on state-approved rolls.

In June, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts ruled in favor of 23 states, led by California, that filed a lawsuit seeking to block Trump’s order.

According to SCOTUSblog, Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the Supreme Court justices in a Wednesday filing that the district court’s ruling could effectively run out the clock on the federal government’s ability to implement key parts of Trump’s order in time for the November midterm elections.

🚨 The Trump administration is urging the Supreme Court to quickly restore President Trump’s election integrity executive order and make clear its ruling should also halt Judge Indira Talwani’s new nationwide injunction against its proposed USPS mail-ballot rules. pic.twitter.com/bQxCY3gbEy

— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) August 12, 2026

SCOTUSblog reports that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit turned down the government’s request to pause Talwani’s June 25 ruling while the litigation continued.

In his supplemental brief this week, Sauer argued that the district court’s ruling would cause “irreparable harm to the federal government, the public, and election integrity.”

The filing was prompted by Talwani’s decision on Tuesday in a separate challenge to the executive order, this time brought by the League of Women Voters (among others), that temporarily bars the U.S. Postal Service from implementing Section 3 of the executive order.

SCOTUSblog reports that Sauer stressed that Tuesday’s injunction sweeps even more broadly than Talwani’s June 25 decision because it applies “nationwide on behalf of” the various groups who are plaintiffs in the new case.

Sauer stated that Tuesday’s ruling suffers from the same problem as its predecessor:

Courts cannot enjoin implementation of an Executive Order that merely instructs agencies to pursue a proposed policy in a manner that is consistent with laws … unless and until those agencies actually take concrete actions that injure the plaintiffs.

Yahoo News reports that existing state-level mail-in voting regulations and schedules remain fully operational while litigation continues.