2026-09-14T23:39:49.656Z / 路透社
2026年5月19日摄于美国宾夕法尼亚州费城，这张示意图展示了宾夕法尼亚州初选期间的一张邮寄选票。路透社/汉娜·贝尔/示意图/档案照片
- 摘要
- 邮政总局新规将落实特朗普的邮寄选票限制令
- 两名下级法院法官已否决美国邮政总局的邮寄选票规则
- 特朗普政府称新规可防止选民欺诈
- 美国选举欺诈的证据极为罕见
9月14日（路透社）——美国最高法院周一拒绝允许美国邮政总局执行一项针对邮寄选票的规则，这对总统唐纳德·特朗普在11月中期选举前限制邮寄投票的努力造成了打击，此次中期选举将决定国会的控制权归属。
大法官们驳回了司法部提出的暂停波士顿联邦地区法官英迪拉·塔尔瓦尼裁决的请求，该裁决阻止邮政总局在各州和投票权团体提起法律诉讼期间执行该措施。特朗普在3月发布行政命令，旨在收紧邮寄投票的相关规定，邮政总局随后采纳了这项措施。
《错误信息监测》通讯汇总国际错误信息叙事，每期都包含“真实还是虚假？”测试题。点击此处订阅。
最高法院在简短的单段命令中表示：“政府在其对地区法院初步禁令的质疑中不太可能在实质问题上胜诉。”
大法官塞缪尔·阿利托与保守派同僚克拉伦斯·托马斯一道，对周一的裁决表示异议，他将部分挑战者的主张比作“橄榄球长传战术”，“不太可能成功完成”。
“邮政总局对邮件监管拥有广泛权限，”阿利托补充道。
没有其他大法官公开表示异议。最高法院目前由6名保守派大法官和3名自由派大法官组成。
特朗普所在的共和党正为在中期选举中保住国会控制权而激战。多项民调显示，民主党选民使用邮寄选票的比例更高，因此限制邮寄选票可能对共和党有利。
另一名联邦法官、华盛顿特区的联邦地区法官卡尔·尼科尔斯也于周日对这项新规则作出不利裁决。
根据这项新规则，各州必须向邮政总局提供邮寄选票收件人名单，并使用经邮政总局批准、带有唯一条形码的寄出和寄回选票信封。邮政总局随后可以拒绝寄出不符合新标准或与不在名单上的选民相关的选票。
批评人士称，随着11月3日投票日临近，该计划可能会扰乱数千张合法选票的递送，并引发混乱，因为许多州正计划向符合资格的选民寄送邮寄选票。尽管此类欺诈的证据极为罕见，但政府表示新规则将防止选民欺诈。
特朗普多年来一直质疑邮寄投票的安全性，之后签署了这项针对邮寄选票的行政令，不过他本人也经常通过邮寄投票。特朗普曾虚假宣称美国选举存在普遍欺诈行为，包括他在2020年大选中输给前民主党总统乔·拜登一事。
政府在9月6日的紧急请求中敦促最高法院允许其实施“一项重要的联邦政策，保护邮件不被用于实施选民欺诈”。
各州对该规则提起诉讼
由多数由民主党州长领导的州、华盛顿特区以及若干投票权团体组成的联盟，对美国邮政总局的这项新规则提起了诉讼。
塔尔瓦尼于9月4日发布禁令阻止该规则生效，认定该规则可能违反美国宪法，因为选举由各州负责管理。塔尔瓦尼还表示，鉴于中期选举日益临近，各州根本来不及遵守该规则。
波士顿的美国第一巡回上诉法院上周四拒绝暂停塔尔瓦尼的禁令。第一巡回法院表示，该规则“很可能会导致全国数百万选民被剥夺选举权，而在打击选民欺诈方面即便有收获也微乎其微”。
尼科尔斯批准了民主党以及包括全国有色人种协进会在内的团体提出的请求，发布初步禁令阻止该规则生效。尼科尔斯写道，该规则可能会让一些人更难通过邮寄方式投票，并且超出了邮政总局的权限范围。
“没有任何法律授予邮政总局制定该规则关键部分的权力，”尼科尔斯写道。
美国50个州都允许某种形式的邮寄投票。其中29个州允许选民无需提供理由即可申请邮寄选票，另有8个州完全采用邮寄方式进行选举。
围绕邮寄选票的斗争是特朗普政府在中期选举前加大联邦对选举干预力度的一系列举措之一。8月24日，最高法院撤销了塔尔瓦尼在6月发布的一项禁令，该禁令曾阻止特朗普的行政令（包括尚未最终定稿的邮政总局规则）生效。
安德鲁·钟在纽约报道；约翰·克鲁泽尔在华盛顿补充报道；威尔·邓汉姆编辑
In loss for Trump, US Supreme Court won’t let Postal Service restrict mail ballots
2026-09-14T23:39:49.656Z / Reuters
A mail-in ballot, during the Pennsylvania primary election, is displayed in this illustration picture taken in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S., May 19, 2026. REUTERS/Hannah Beier/Illustration/File Photo
- Summary
- Postal service rule would implement Trump’s mail-in ballot order
- Two lower-court judges have blocked USPS mail-ballot rule
- Trump administration says rule would prevent voter fraud
- Evidence of US voting fraud is rare
Sept 14 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to let the U.S. Postal Service enforce a rule targeting mail-in ballots, dealing a setback to President Donald Trump’s effort to restrict voting by mail ahead of November’s midterm elections that will determine control of Congress.
The justices denied the Justice Department’s request to lift a ruling by Boston-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani that blocked the Postal Service from enforcing the measure while legal challenges by states and voting-rights groups proceed. The agency adopted the measure after Trump issued a March executive order aimed at tightening rules governing mail voting.
The Misinformation Monitor newsletter rounds up international misinformation narratives, with a “Real or Fake?” quiz in every edition. Sign up here.
“The government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the District Court’s preliminary injunction,” the court said in its brief, one-paragraph order.
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, dissented from Monday’s decision, comparing some of the challengers’ claims to a “Hail Mary pass” that is “unlikely to be successfully completed,” using a football analogy.
“The Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail,” Alito added.
No other justice dissented publicly. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority.
Trump’s fellow Republicans are locked in a tight battle to retain control of Congress in the midterms. Restricting mail-in ballots would stand to benefit Republicans given that Democratic voters disproportionately use mail-in ballots, according to various surveys.
Another federal judge, Washington, D.C.-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, also ruled against the new rule on Sunday.
Under the new rule, states would have to provide lists of mail ballot recipients to the Postal Service and use agency-approved outbound and return ballot mail envelopes outfitted with unique barcodes. The Postal Service could then refuse to send out ballots that do not comply with the new standards or are associated with voters who do not appear on the lists.
Critics have said the plan could disrupt the delivery of thousands of legitimate ballots as the November 3 vote approaches and cause chaos given imminent plans by many states to send out mail ballots to eligible voters. The administration has said the new rule will prevent voter fraud, though evidence of such fraud is rare.
Trump signed his executive order targeting mail-in ballots after years of casting doubt on their security, though he often votes by mail himself. Trump has made false claims of widespread fraud in U.S. elections including his 2020 loss to former Democratic President Joe Biden.
The administration in a September 6 emergency request urged the Supreme Court to allow it to implement an “important federal policy to protect the mails from being used to commit voter fraud.”
STATES CHALLENGED THE RULE
A coalition of states, most of them Democratic-governed, and Washington, D.C., as well as a number of voting-rights groups, challenged the new USPS rule.
Talwani imposed an injunction on September 4 blocking the rule, finding that it likely violated the U.S. Constitution, under which states administer elections. Talwani also said it would be impossible for the states to comply given the rapidly approaching midterms.
The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused last Thursday to put Talwani’s order on hold. The 1st Circuit said that the rule “will likely result in the disenfranchisement of millions of voters across the country while providing minimal — if any — gains in combating voter fraud.”
Nichols granted a request from the Democratic Party and groups including the NAACP for a preliminary injunction blocking the rule. Nichols wrote that the rule could make it harder for some people to vote by mail and that it exceeded the Postal Service’s authority.
“No statute grants the Postal Service the power to issue key parts of the rule,” Nichols wrote.
All 50 states allow for some form of mail-in voting. Of those, 29 states allow voters to ask to cast ballots by mail without providing a reason, and eight conduct their elections entirely by mail.
The battle over mail ballots is one in a series of efforts by the administration to boost federal involvement in voting ahead of the midterms. On August 24, the Supreme Court lifted an earlier injunction imposed by Talwani in June blocking Trump’s executive order, including the USPS rule before it had been finalized.
Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Additional reporting by John Kruzel in Washington; Editing by Will Dunham
