The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday upheld a lower court’s decision to decline to temporarily block President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to develop new procedures related to mail voting, ruling that the legal challenge was brought too early.
The unanimous three-judge panel affirmed the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction sought by top Democratic Party committees and leaders, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
The lawsuit challenged Executive Order 14,399, signed March 31, which directs the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the U.S. Postal Service, and other agencies to develop proposals affecting mail voting and voter citizenship verification. Those proposals include creating state citizenship lists from federal databases and developing rules governing the mailing of absentee ballots.
The appeals court did not decide whether those actions would ultimately be lawful. Instead, it concluded that the dispute was not yet ripe because the executive order primarily directs agencies to develop future policies rather than immediately changing election procedures.
The panel said that if federal agencies later implement the order in a way that violates federal law or the Constitution, the plaintiffs may seek judicial relief at that time.
The Democratic organizations argued the executive order exceeded presidential authority over elections, violated the Privacy Act by contemplating the use of federal databases to create citizenship lists, and directed the Postal Service to pursue mail ballot policies beyond its statutory power.
In affirming the lower court, the appeals court relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in “Trump v. New York,” which held that courts generally should not intervene before executive branch actions have been implemented and injuries have occurred. The judges said many of the plaintiffs’ alleged harms depended on future agency actions that had not yet taken place.
The panel also rejected arguments that delaying review would make future challenges more difficult because of the proximity to the 2026 election. The court said that if agencies attempted to impose unlawful election changes close to the election, courts could still issue injunctions preserving existing election procedures.
“Big win from the D.C. Circuit affirming @POTUS efforts to keep our elections safe and fair,” Brett Shumate, assistant attorney general for the DOJ, posted on X on July 28.
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee didn’t respond to an email seeking comment. It did post a statement in May after the lower court ruled against it.
