2026年9月3日 / 美国东部时间下午6:14 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
华盛顿讯——美国司法部周四请求最高法院介入美国邮政局关于邮寄选票的规定引发的持续法律纠纷,要求允许该机构执行相关规定,此时距11月中期选举仅剩数周。
在向高等法院提交的紧急上诉中,司法部副部长D.约翰·索尔请求大法官们暂停地区法院发布的、阻止邮政局执行相关规定的临时禁令。
这份由美国地区法官因迪拉·塔尔瓦尼上周签发的为期14天的禁令,还将继续生效数日。司法部已就该裁决提起上诉,但上诉法院尚未采取行动。
塔尔瓦尼还在审议二十多个由民主党领导的州和民权投票组织提出的延长救济期限的请求,这些组织质疑邮寄投票措施的合法性。她于周四早些时候举行听证会,审议他们提出的初步禁令申请。
负责处理美国第一巡回上诉法院紧急上诉的大法官凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊已要求各州和民权投票组织于周二上午前对特朗普政府的请求作出回应。
索尔在向高等法院提交的请求中写道,邮政局的规定“仅对邮寄的联邦选举选票提出了适度的信封设计和收件人信息要求”。
他写道:“该规定监管的是美国邮政服务,而非联邦选举,显然是符合宪法的。虽然各州对选举方式拥有主要监管权,但它们不能选择使用联邦邮政系统开展选举,却又坚称其与选举相关的邮件可豁免国会授予邮政局监管信封设计和收件人信息的规则制定权。”
索尔辩称,法官的禁令“无效化”了邮政局为防范邮寄投票中的选民欺诈风险所做的努力,他称邮寄投票欺诈“是一种特别有害的欺诈形式,会稀释合法选民的选票,妨碍选举结果反映美国民众的意愿,破坏‘公众对选举过程公正性的信心’”。
特朗普政府并未拿出存在大规模选民欺诈的证据,而特朗普总统本人今年在佛罗里达州的选举中就通过邮寄方式投了票。
这场快速发展的法律纠纷正值各州准备向选民邮寄选票之际。威斯康星州至少两个市政当局已开始邮寄选票,北卡罗来纳州的选票将于本周五寄发给特定选民。更多州将在9月中旬左右开始邮寄选票。
本案争议焦点是邮政局发布的一项最终规定,该规定要求各州和地方政府满足邮寄选票的设计要求,包括使用唯一条形码,并通过在线门户提交将通过邮寄方式投票的居民的相关信息,包括他们的姓名、地址和个性化条形码。
这些选民将在邮政局登记,并被纳入各州专属的“邮寄及缺席投票参与名单”。
该规定要求邮政工作人员审核并验证寄送给选民的选票邮件。邮政局表示,任何不符合相关要求的选票邮件“将不予受理,并退回选举办公室”。
特朗普政府称,该规定对各州和地方政府仅提出了“适度的信息披露要求”,“绝不会阻止任何一名选民通过邮寄方式投票”。
索尔在周四的紧急上诉中表示:“邮政局不会对选民资格进行任何核查;其职责仅限于确保信封符合该规定的设计和信息要求。”
但各州和地方选举官员担忧,在11月3日中期选举来临之际,他们无法及时遵守这些要求。他们在法庭文件中表示,选票信封已完成订购和印刷,且向门户网站提交选民信息将耗费大量时间和资源。
邮政局一名高级官员周四在一份文件中表示,该机构仍在对新的联邦选票邮寄门户网站进行“优化”。邮政局执行副总裁史蒂文·蒙泰斯在文件中称,预计该系统将“在下周某个时候”投入自愿使用。
这些邮寄投票限制措施是邮政局为响应特朗普先生3月份签署的一项行政令而实施的。除了向邮政局下达新指令外,该行政令还要求国土安全部编制包含美国公民居民信息的“州公民身份名单”,并指示司法部长优先调查和起诉为无资格投票者发放选票的选举官员。
但一批由民主党领导的州提起诉讼,挑战特朗普先生的这项行政令。塔尔瓦尼在该案中曾阻止特朗普政府推进该指令,但最高法院上周冻结了她的裁决。
就在最高法院发布该裁决的几天前,邮政局公布了其针对邮寄选票和投票的新规定。
虽然最高法院在涉及该行政令的案件中为特朗普政府提供了救济,但其裁决是程序性的。最高法院并未就特朗普先生指示邮政局和国土安全部实施的邮寄投票限制的实质内容作出裁决。相反,最高法院的保守派多数意见认为,各州的诉讼时机尚不成熟。
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow Postal Service rules on mail ballots
September 3, 2026 / 6:14 PM EDT / CBS News
Washington — The Justice Department on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to intervene in an ongoing legal battle over U.S. Postal Service rules for mail ballots just weeks before the November midterm elections and allow the agency to enforce them.
In an emergency appeal to the high court, Solicitor General D. John Sauer requested the justices halt a district court’s temporary order blocking enforcement of the Postal Service requirements.
That 14-day order, issued by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani last week, is set to remain in place for several more days. The Justice Department has appealed that decision, but the appeals court has not yet acted.
Talwani is also considering a request for longer relief from two dozen Democratic-led states and voting rights groups challenging the legality of the mail-voting measures. She held a hearing earlier Thursday to consider their bid for a preliminary injunction.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who handles emergency appeals from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, has asked the states and voting rights organizations to respond to the Trump administration’s request by Tuesday morning.
Sauer wrote in his request to the high court that the Postal Service’s rule “imposes only modest envelope-design and addressee-information requirements for federal-election ballots sent.”
“The Rule’s regulation of the U.S. Mail—not federal elections — is plainly constitutional,” he wrote. “While the States have primary authority to regulate the manner of elections, they cannot choose to use the federal mails to carry out their elections but then insist that their election-related mail is somehow exempt from the Postal Service’s rulemaking authority, conferred by Congress, to regulate envelope design and addressee information.”
Sauer argued the judge’s block “nullifies” the Postal Service’s attempts to address the risk of voter fraud through mail voting, which he called “a particularly pernicious species of fraud that dilutes the votes of lawful voters, prevents election results from reflecting the will of the American people, and undermines ‘public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process.’”
The Trump administration has not put forth evidence of widespread voter fraud, and President Trump himself has voted by mail in elections in Florida this year.
The fast-moving legal battle is unfolding as states gear up to send mail ballots to voters. At least two municipalities in Wisconsin have already mailed ballots out, and in North Carolina, they will go out to certain voters Friday. More states will begin sending mail ballots around mid-September.
At issue in the case is a final rule issued by the Postal Service that requires states and localities to meet design requirements for mail ballots, including unique barcodes, and to submit to an online portal information about residents who will vote by mail, including their names, addresses and the individualized barcodes.
Those voters will be enrolled with the Postal Service and be included on state-specific “Mail-In and Absentee Participation Lists.”
The rule requires postal workers to review and verify ballot mail being sent to voters. Any ballot mailings that don’t comply with the requirements “will not be accepted and will be returned” to the election offices, the Postal Service said.
The Trump administration has said the rule imposes “modest informational requirements” on states and localities, and “should not prevent a single voter from voting by mail.”
“The Postal Service will not perform any verification of voter eligibility; its role is limited to ensuring that envelopes comply with the Rule’s design and informational requirements,” Sauer said in Thursday’s emergency appeal.
But state and local election officials have raised concerns about their ability to comply with the requirements so soon before the Nov. 3 midterms. They said in court filings that ballot envelopes have already been ordered and printed, and said submitting voters’ information to the portal would demand significant time and resources.
A top official with the Postal Service said in a filing Thursday that the agency continues to make “refinements” to the new Federal Ballot Mail Portal. The Postal Service anticipates the system will be available for voluntary use “by sometime next week,” Steven Monteith, executive vice president of the Postal Service, said in a filing.
The mail-voting limits were implemented by the Postal Service in response to an executive order signed by Mr. Trump in March. In addition to the new directives for the Postal Service, the executive order calls for the Department of Homeland Security to compile “State Citizenship Lists” of residents who are U.S. citizens, and instructs the attorney general to prioritize investigations and prosecutions against election officials who issue ballots of people ineligible to vote.
But a contingent of Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit challenging Mr. Trump’s executive order. While Talwani in that case had blocked the Trump administration from moving forward with the directive, the Supreme Court last week froze her decision.
The Postal Service published its new rules for mail ballots and voting just days before the Supreme Court issued its ruling.
While the high court in that case involving the executive order granted the Trump administration relief, its decision was procedural. The Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the mail-ballot restrictions that Mr. Trump directed the Postal Service and Homeland Security Department to impose. Instead, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority said the states’ lawsuit was premature.
发表回复