U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts has issued another block on President Donald Trump’s executive order to restrict mail-in voting, complicating the administration’s efforts to limit the practice before the midterms. The order, which mandates that states comply with specific Postal Service formatting and listing requirements for mail ballots, faces a legal challenge from voting rights groups and Democratic-led states.

Supreme Court’s Procedural Win Doesn’t Settle the Issue

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled in a procedural matter that allowed the administration to proceed with implementing the executive order, according to the Idaho State Journal. However, this decision did not affect Judge Talwani’s earlier ruling from August that blocks certain aspects of the order from being carried out; the administration has now asked her to vacate her decision, while voting rights groups argue the block should remain in place.

Democrats have criticized the executive order, claiming it violates the Constitution by attempting to shift election administration powers from the states to the federal government. “Under the Constitution, states are responsible for administering elections,” the Idaho State Journal reported, adding that many Democrats have argued Trump’s order seeks to unlawfully take that power for the executive branch.

Legal Challenge Stalls Implementation

The current block by Judge Talwani was issued on Thursday, according to the WV News, and halts implementation of the order for two weeks; the decision came after voting rights groups and Democratic-led states refiled their lawsuits to comply with the recent Supreme Court procedural ruling. The high court had said Talwani had acted too soon in her original decision but did not rule on the legality of the executive order itself.

The ruling has significant implications for the midterms, as nearly one-third of Americans vote by mail, but Election officials say they lack the time and resources to revise their systems to comply with new Postal Service requirements. “Plaintiff states have neither time nor funds to design new mail ballots, seek approval of the new designs, order production of mail ballots, update their own election management systems, train election officials to use the USPS portal and upload citizen data to the portal, all before the midterms,” Talwani wrote in her Thursday order.

These requirements were outlined in a formal rule issued by the administration, effectively restarting the legal fight, though a hearing in the case is scheduled for Sept. 3. The Postal Service has stated it will only deliver mail ballots if states provide a list of voters who should receive them and format the envelopes in a specific way.

Legal Uncertainty Lingers Ahead of Midterms

With just weeks before the first mail ballots are due to be sent out, the legal uncertainty creates a significant challenge for election officials, but the administration has not yet responded to requests for comment. The case is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court again soon, according to the WV News, adding to the back-and-forth that has already delayed implementation of the executive order.

While the Supreme Court’s recent procedural ruling allowed the administration to move forward with the order, it did not resolve the underlying legal dispute — that issue remains before Judge Talwani in a case brought by the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts and other voting rights groups. The legal battle highlights the deepening divide over how mail-in voting is handled in the U.S. and its role in the upcoming midterms.