Trump’s Mail-Ballot Order Is Blocked in 23 States, but Not Kentucky
The Postal Service has paused its final rule, but Kentucky election officials have not publicly explained what they will do if the federal requirements return before November.
A federal appeals court on July 25 kept President Donald Trump’s mail-ballot executive order blocked in 23 states and the District of Columbia through the November election. Kentucky is not one of them. The injunction protects Virginia, Illinois and the other governments that sued, but it does not prevent federal agencies from implementing the order here. Read the First Circuit’s July 25 order.
Kentucky’s absentee-ballot procedures have not changed. On July 17, the U.S. Postal Service said it would not publish its final ballot-mail rule unless the government first obtained relief from all relevant court injunctions. The proposed federal requirements are on hold, even in states such as Kentucky that are outside the protection of the First Circuit case. Read the Postal Service notice.
That pause leaves an unanswered question in Frankfort. Secretary of State Michael Adams, the Kentucky State Board of Elections and the state’s 120 county clerks still need to know whether the requirements will return before ballots are prepared for November. Kentuckians also need to know whether state officials are preparing to comply, considering a legal challenge or waiting for the courts to settle the issue.
A court order that stops at state lines
President Trump issued Executive Order 14399 on March 31. The order directs federal agencies to create state citizenship lists and instructs the Postal Service to establish new requirements for absentee ballots sent through the mail. It also tells the Justice Department to prioritize investigations and possible prosecutions involving ballots provided to people considered ineligible.
Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia sued. On June 25, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled that Sections 2 and 3 of the order exceeded presidential authority and violated the separation of powers. The court later entered final judgment barring federal agencies from enforcing those sections against the plaintiff governments for federal elections held on or before November 3. Read the district court’s June 25 order.
Kentucky did not join the lawsuit. It also was not among the 12 states, including Indiana, that intervened to defend the executive order.
The administration asked the First Circuit to suspend the injunction while the appeal proceeds. At this stage, it did not defend the order’s ultimate legality. It argued that the plaintiff states had sued too early because the Postal Service had not completed its rule and other federal preparations were still underway.
The appeals court rejected that argument in a 2-1 decision. The majority pointed to the expenses, staff work, and legal risks election offices already faced as they prepared for fall elections. It also emphasized the narrow reach of the remedy: federal officials remain free under this injunction to implement the order in states that did not sue.
Kentucky is outside the injunction.
What the Postal Service proposed
The Postal Service proposal published June 2 would establish new federal standards for absentee ballots used in general, special and runoff elections for federal office. It would require separate, serialized Intelligent Mail barcodes on outgoing and return ballot envelopes. The envelopes would also need official election-mail markings, automation-compatible designs and Postal Service approval.
Before an outgoing mailing entered the postal network, Kentucky or an authorized county official or mailing contractor would upload each voter’s name, address and two envelope barcodes to a Federal Ballot Mail Portal. The state or its authorized mailer would certify that the mailing met the federal requirements. Postal employees would review the mailing before accepting it.
A mailing that failed the review would be returned to the county clerk or contractor for correction. The proposal says USPS would not be responsible for delays caused by a mailer’s failure to meet the preparation, portal or entry requirements.
Postal employees would not decide whether a voter qualifies for an absentee ballot. Kentucky officials would continue making that decision under Kentucky law. USPS would determine whether the state’s mailing, barcodes and uploaded information matched the federal requirements.
The proposed federal database would still contain individualized ballot information. A separate July 17 Privacy Act notice says the Postal Service system would store voters’ names and addresses, the barcodes assigned to their outgoing and return envelopes, and the state or locality that issued the ballot. The records would be retained for five years, and the notice lists facilitating law-enforcement efforts as one purpose of the database.
Kentucky election offices would carry out the work
Kentucky law assigns statewide election administration to the State Board of Elections, an independent state agency. Adams serves as the Commonwealth’s chief election official and chairs the board. The board administers state election laws and supervises voter registration and removal. Read KRS 117.015.
County clerks perform much of the absentee-ballot work. They receive approved requests, determine whether applicants qualify, issue ballots and send them to voters. State law generally requires a clerk to transmit an eligible voter’s ballot within four days of receiving the request or within four days after ballots become available. Read KRS 117.085.
Kentucky already places a voter-specific barcode or label on the outer return envelope. That does not establish compliance with the federal proposal, which calls for federally specified Intelligent Mail barcodes on both envelopes, federal data submissions and USPS design review.
If the federal rule returns, Adams and the State Board would have to establish Kentucky’s statewide approach and authorize users of the federal portal. County clerks, printing companies and mailing contractors would handle the envelope designs, barcode files, certifications and mailings. Kentucky’s legal officers would separately have to decide whether to challenge the requirements in court.
Federal policy began in the White House, but the work would be carried out ballot by ballot in county election offices.
A rejected mailing or failed portal submission would become a local problem, even though the requirement originated with the president and the Postal Service.
The pause buys time, not protection
The executive order directed USPS to publish a final rule by July 29. The Postal Service has now said it will not do so unless the government obtains relief from all relevant injunctions. As of July 26, there is no final rule or enforceable set of new ballot-mail standards.
Kentucky clerks are not currently required to replace their envelopes, upload voter information to a federal portal or submit mailings for the proposed acceptance review. If the injunctions are lifted or narrowed, however, Kentucky has not secured the legal protection held by the plaintiff states.
The timing could become difficult quickly. Kentucky’s absentee-request portal opens September 19 and, under state law, closes October 20. County clerks must have ballots printed 50 days before a regular election and must send eligible voters their ballots within the statutory deadlines.
Kentucky transmitted 131,762 mail ballots in 2024. More than 116,000 voters cast ballots by mail, or 5.6 percent of participating voters. Mail voting is a minority method in Kentucky, but it is still a statewide operation involving every county. Read the Election Assistance Commission’s Kentucky data brief.
Kentucky has not publicly stated its position
As of July 26, I found no State Board resolution, meeting discussion, implementation memorandum, or public statement explaining how Kentucky intends to respond to Executive Order 14399 or the proposed federal ballot portal. The absence of a published position does not prove that no work is occurring. State officials may be reviewing the proposal, communicating with federal agencies, or waiting for the litigation to develop.
The public record does not yet answer whether Kentucky has received portal instructions, whether county clerks have been told to prepare, whether current envelopes meet any portion of the proposal or how much compliance would cost. It also does not show whether Adams, the State Board, or Attorney General Russell Coleman is considering legal action.
Those questions become more urgent if the Postal Service obtains permission to finalize the rule. Printers cannot redesign and produce election envelopes overnight. County clerks also need time to alter data files, train employees and coordinate with mailing contractors.
A federal judge declared central sections of the order unlawful, but the remedy protects the governments that sued.
The Postal Service’s current pause prevents immediate implementation, while Kentucky’s underlying legal position remains unchanged. The Commonwealth is outside the injunction and has not publicly explained what it will do if the requirements return.
What you can ask and watch
A focused open-records request to the Kentucky State Board of Elections could seek correspondence with USPS, the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department concerning Executive Order 14399. It could also request draft county-clerk guidance, portal instructions, envelope specifications, vendor communications, cost estimates and any legal analysis prepared for the board.
You can ask Adams and the State Board three direct questions:
Has Kentucky received instructions, technical specifications or deadlines for the Federal Ballot Mail Portal?
Have county clerks or ballot vendors been advised to change their 2026 procedures?
Will Kentucky seek court protection if USPS is permitted to finalize the rule?
The State Board says its regular meetings are held on the third Tuesday of each month at 10 a.m. and streamed online. Readers can check the board’s meeting materials and ask that the executive order be placed on a public agenda. Visit the State Board of Elections website.
The court docket also remains active. The First Circuit appeal continues, and a hearing is scheduled for August 7 on a renewed request for an injunction in a separate challenge brought by voting-rights organizations. Those proceedings will help determine whether the Postal Service remains unable to finalize the rule and whether any future relief extends beyond the states that sued.
The next useful evidence will come from a court order, a Postal Service notice or Kentucky’s own records.
Further Reading and Sources
Federal primary sources
Executive Order 14399: Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections
USPS Privacy Act Notice for the Proposed Federal Ballot Mail System