2026年9月2日 美国东部时间下午4:35 / 福克斯新闻
因达·塔尔瓦尼法官将于周四就可能延长禁令的初步禁令举行听证会
作者：伊莱恩·马伦
选举专家称法官正试图“拖延时间”阻挠特朗普的邮寄选票规则
杰森·斯尼德指责民主党领导的州抵制新的美国邮政署（USPS）邮寄选票标准，而律师格雷戈里·托伊菲尔则认为联邦法院越权阻止了这些规则的实施。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章！
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/da13b3d3-7a34-479c-8acd-1e842a70bb72
收听本文
5分钟
奥巴马任命的联邦法官因在2026年中期选举前再次阻止美国邮政署新的邮寄选票要求，被贴上“激进主义者”的标签。
美国地区法官因达·塔尔瓦尼上周发布了14天临时限制令，阻止了一项新的美国邮政署关于邮寄外出选票政策的关键条款。该规则是针对唐纳德·特朗普总统的一项行政令制定的，要求选举官员提交选票信封设计以供审批，并将选民信息和唯一追踪条形码上传至美国邮政署的新门户网站。
诚实选举项目执行董事杰森·斯尼德指责塔尔瓦尼试图“拖延时间”，他认为持续的诉讼可能会导致该规则在各州开始邮寄中期选举选票前无法生效。
“由于本案中左派的闹剧，我们很可能无法在2026年中期选举前实施这项规则，”斯尼德告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。“选票几天内就要寄出了，我认为在某种程度上，他们拖延时间的策略可能已经得逞了。”
邮寄选票打击行动继续推进，特朗普法院胜诉为联邦行动打开大门
2014年拍摄的美国地区法官因达·塔尔瓦尼。（亚历克斯·王/盖蒂图片社）
北卡罗来纳州各郡选举委员会定于周五开始邮寄缺席选票。斯尼德和OGC法律有限责任公司创始人格雷戈里·托伊菲尔都指出，该州的选举官员已经在着手遵守美国邮政署的相关要求。
塔尔瓦尼认为，各州没有足够的时间和资金在中期选举前重新设计选票信封、获得美国邮政署批准、修改选举管理系统、培训官员使用新门户网站并上传选民信息。她得出结论，对于即将到来的选举来说，遵守规则“几乎不可能”，并警告称合格选民可能会被剥夺选举权。
斯尼德反驳了这一结论，称该规则将美国邮政署长期以来的建议转变为强制性要求。
“这是一项相当 straightforward 的规则，”斯尼德说。“它很大程度上基于已经实施的最佳实践，并收集各州已经掌握的数据。就合规而言，负担极小，美国邮政署只是想更好地规范邮件——而非试图掌控选举，或是从各州手中夺走谁有资格投票这类基本的宪法问题。”
塔尔瓦尼6月25日发布的永久禁令阻止了美国邮政署为2026年选举完成部分规则制定流程。
联邦上诉法院驳回特朗普在中期选举前强制执行邮寄选票命令的请求
2026年3月31日，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普在华盛顿特区白宫椭圆形办公室展示已签署的行政令。特朗普当日签署了一项旨在加大选民邮寄选票难度的行政令，升级了他针对这项数百万美国人使用的投票方式的长期运动。（亚伦·施瓦茨/CNP/彭博社 via 盖蒂图片社）
这场争议上诉至最高法院，最高法院于8月24日暂停了塔尔瓦尼此前的判决，理由是特朗普政府很可能会胜诉，即最初的诉讼时机不成熟，因为美国邮政署尚未发布最终规则。
大法官们并未就行政令或随后的美国邮政署规则是否合法作出裁决。在美国邮政署敲定该政策后，由民主党领导的州修改了诉讼，直接挑战该规则。塔尔瓦尼随后发布了最新的临时限制令。
“具有讽刺意味的是，正是法官制造了这个问题，因为她最初的禁令阻止了美国邮政署更早——几个月前——制定规则，而如果最高法院允许该规则推进，这原本可以让各州有更多时间准备遵守规则，”托伊菲尔说。
“当法官指出开支和实际困难时，这些开支和困难部分是由法院自身造成的——而非规则本身，也不是试图实施规则造成的，”他补充道。
塔尔瓦尼在最新的裁决中反驳了这一说法，写道“并未出现此类拖延”，因为尽管此前存在禁令，美国邮政署仍继续发布了拟议规则、征求意见并发布了最终政策。
美国邮政署卷入邮寄选票之争，特朗普命令陷入法律纠纷
2026年3月31日，唐纳德·特朗普总统在华盛顿特区白宫椭圆形办公室签署关于邮寄选票的行政令。（路透社/埃文·武奇）
尽管提出批评，但托伊菲尔并未直接指责塔尔瓦尼出于党派动机行事。
“根据我目前掌握的信息，我很难指控法院存在党派偏见，”托伊菲尔说。“当然，法院在针对行政令发布最初禁令时越权了，这看起来不太好。”
塔尔瓦尼将于周四就挑战者提出的初步禁令请求举行听证会，该禁令可能会在诉讼持续期间更长时间地阻止美国邮政署的规则实施。与此同时，现有14天的临时限制令仍然有效，而特朗普政府对塔尔瓦尼先前判决的上诉正在第一巡回法院审理。
订阅获取政治新闻通讯
斯尼德认为，这场法律纠纷的核心在于美国邮政署是在规范选举，还是仅仅为其所承运的邮件设定条件。
“政府的反驳是，这只是一项与其他规则无异的邮政规则，美国邮政署拥有广泛的权力规范使用其服务的邮件，”斯尼德说。“这本质上与要求邮件使用信封或已付邮资之类的规则是同一类。”
点击此处下载福克斯新闻APP
即使该政策在中期选举期间无法生效，斯尼德表示，各州应该有充足的时间在下次总统选举前遵守该规则。
“这是一项非常普通的规则，合规非常简单，尤其是按照我们为2028年选举做准备的时间线来看，”斯尼德说。“这不是能否遵守规则的问题，而是在抵制为邮寄投票带来更大透明度和安全性的努力。”
伊莱恩·马伦是福克斯新闻数字频道和福克斯商业频道的撰稿人，报道全国政治。
Obama-appointed judge ripped for blocking Trump mail-ballot rule: ‘Run out the clock’
September 2, 2026 4:35pm EDT / Fox News
Judge Indira Talwani will hear arguments Thursday on a preliminary injunction that could extend the block
By Elaine Mallon
Election expert says judge is trying to ‘run out the clock’ on Trump mail-ballot rule
Jason Snead accused Democratic-led states of resisting new USPS mail-ballot standards, while attorney Gregory Teufel argued the federal court overstepped its authority in blocking their implementation.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/da13b3d3-7a34-479c-8acd-1e842a70bb72
Listen to this article
5 min
An Obama-appointed federal judge is being branded an “activist” after she again blocked new U.S. Postal Service (USPS) mail-ballot requirements ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a 14-day temporary restraining order last week blocking key portions of a new USPS policy governing the mailing of outbound ballots. The rule, developed in response to an executive order from President Donald Trump, would require election officials to submit ballot-envelope designs for approval and upload voter information and unique tracking barcodes to a new USPS portal.
Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Election Project, accused Talwani of trying to “run out the clock,” arguing that the continued litigation could prevent the rule from taking effect before states begin mailing ballots for the midterms.
“Because of the antics of the left in this case, it’s very possible that we will not be able to get this rule put in place for the 2026 midterms,” Snead told Fox News Digital. “Ballots do go out in just a couple of days, and I think, to a certain extent, their campaign to run out the clock may have succeeded.”
MAIL-VOTING CRACKDOWN MOVES AHEAD AS TRUMP COURT WIN OPENS DOOR TO FEDERAL ACTION
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani pictured in 2014.(Alex Wong/Getty Images)
North Carolina county election boards are scheduled to begin mailing absentee ballots Friday. Snead and Gregory Teufel, founder of OGC Law, LLC, both noted that election officials in the state had already taken steps toward complying with the USPS requirements.
Talwani found that the states lacked the time and money to redesign ballot envelopes, obtain USPS approval, modify election-management systems, train officials to use the new portal and upload voter information before the midterms. She concluded that compliance was “practically impossible” for the approaching election and warned that eligible voters could be disenfranchised.
Snead pushed back on that conclusion, arguing that the rule puts longstanding USPS recommendations into mandatory requirements.
“It’s a fairly straightforward rule,” Snead said. “It’s largely premised on best practices that are already in place and gathering data that states already possess. The burdens are extraordinarily minimal as far as compliance is concerned, and the Postal Service is really just trying to better regulate the mail—not attempt to seize control of elections or to take away fundamental constitutional questions, like who is eligible to vote, away from the states.”
Talwani’s June 25 permanent injunction barred USPS from completing portions of the rulemaking process for the 2026 election.
FEDERAL APPEALS COURT REJECTS TRUMP BID TO ENFORCE MAIL BALLOT ORDER AHEAD OF MIDTERM ELECTIONS
US President Donald Trump displays a signed executive order in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, March 31, 2026. Trump signed an executive order Tuesday intended to make it harder for voters to cast mail-in ballots, escalating his long-running campaign against a practice used by millions of Americans.(Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
The dispute reached the Supreme Court, which stayed Talwani’s earlier judgment on Aug. 24 after concluding that the Trump administration was likely to prevail on its argument that the original challenge was premature because USPS had not yet issued a final rule.
The justices did not decide whether the executive order or the subsequent USPS rule was lawful. After USPS finalized the policy, the Democratic-led states amended their lawsuit to directly challenge the rule. Talwani then issued the latest temporary restraining order.
“Ironically, the judge created that problem because her original injunction prevented the U.S. Postal Service from developing the rules earlier, months earlier, which would have allowed the states more time to prepare to follow the rule if the Supreme Court were to allow the rule to proceed,” Teufel said.
“When the judge points to expenses and practical difficulties, those are expenses and difficulties created in part by the court itself—not by the rule and not by the attempted implementation of the rule,” he added.
Talwani disputed that characterization in her latest order, writing that “no such delay occurred” because USPS had proceeded with publishing a proposed rule, receiving comments and issuing its final policy despite the earlier injunction.
POSTAL SERVICE THRUST INTO MAIL-IN BALLOT FIGHT AS TRUMP ORDER GETS TIED UP IN COURT
President Donald Trump signs an executive order on mail ballots, in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., March 31, 2026.(REUTERS/Evan Vucci)
Despite his criticism, Teufel stopped short of accusing Talwani of acting for partisan reasons.
“It’s hard for me to accuse the court of partisanship based on the information I have at the present time,” Teufel said. “Certainly, the court exceeded its authority in issuing the initial injunction against the executive order, which is not a good look.”
Talwani is set to hear arguments Thursday on the challengers’ request for a preliminary injunction, which could block the USPS rule for a longer period as the litigation continues. The existing 14-day temporary restraining order remains in place in the meantime while the Trump administration’s appeal of Talwani’s earlier judgment is pending before the First Circuit.
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
Snead argued that the legal dispute turns on whether USPS is regulating elections or merely setting conditions for the mail it carries.
“What the government counters is that this is just a Postal Service rule like any other and that the Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail that is using the Postal Service,” Snead said. “This is essentially the same sort of rule as requiring that mail pieces be in envelopes, for instance, or have postage paid.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Even if the policy does not take effect for the midterms, Snead said states should have ample time to comply before the next presidential election.
“This is a very mundane rule, very simple to comply with, especially on the kind of timeline that we’re talking about in preparation for 2028,” Snead said. “It’s not about being able to comply with this rule. It is just about resisting efforts to bring greater transparency and security to mail voting.”
Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.
发表回复