Intelligence. Accountability. Analysis.
Est. 2022 · Washington, D.C.
The Congressional Times
We follow the data, not the narrative
◆ Live Intelligence
Loading...
Analysis Loading today's analysis...
Federal Policy

Attorney General Blanche: White House Will Follow Supreme Court Mail Ballot Ruling

Attorney General Blanche: White House Will Follow Supreme Court Mail Ballot Ruling

The statement closes one question about executive compliance but leaves open whether the Postal Service will reverse its new mail-voting regulations before the November election.

Gab-E Intelligence Platform · September 16, 2026

Attorney General Todd Blanche said Tuesday that the White House will comply with a Supreme Court order that preserved a lower court ruling blocking the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing new mail-voting regulations. Blanche made the statement directly to CBS News correspondent Ed O'Keefe, saying "of course" the administration would follow the Court's decision, according to CBS News.

The Supreme Court's order kept in place an injunction against U.S. Postal Service regulations that would have changed how mail ballots are processed and delivered. The lower court had found the regulations legally insufficient and blocked their enforcement pending further review. The Supreme Court declined to lift that block, leaving the injunction standing as of September 15, 2026.

The Postal Service regulations at issue governed the handling and delivery timelines for mail-in ballots. Specifics of those regulations, including the docket number of the underlying administrative rulemaking, are contained in the Postal Service's Federal Register filings, which are the public record that would detail exactly which operational changes were proposed and which provisions remain under legal challenge.

Blanche's statement is notable because questions about executive branch compliance with court orders have been a recurring point of congressional oversight during the current administration. The Attorney General did not, in the CBS News exchange, specify what operational steps the Postal Service would take to conform to the injunction or by what date those steps would be completed.

Mail voting has been a contested policy area in Congress and in federal courts since at least 2020. Litigation over state and federal mail-ballot rules has produced a series of appellate and Supreme Court decisions addressing everything from signature-matching requirements to ballot receipt deadlines. The specific litigation here involves federal agency rulemaking authority, a distinct legal track from state-level ballot disputes.

With the 2026 midterm elections approximately seven weeks away, the timing of the ruling and the Attorney General's public compliance statement carry direct operational significance. Election administrators in states that rely heavily on mail voting will need to know whether Postal Service procedures will remain unchanged through Election Day. The injunction, as currently standing, would require the Postal Service to continue operating under its pre-regulation procedures.

Congress has oversight authority over the Postal Service through the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Neither committee had issued a public statement on the Supreme Court order or the Attorney General's remarks as of the time of publication.

The Department of Justice, which Blanche leads, is the legal representative of federal agencies including the Postal Service in most federal court proceedings. Whether the department will appeal the underlying lower court ruling further, seek a modification of the injunction, or allow the case to proceed on its current schedule is not stated in the CBS News report and was not addressed in Blanche's public remarks.

For broader context on oversight of federal agency compliance with judicial orders, the Congressional Times previously reported on FBI Director Patel Testifies on Firings, Hiring Standards, and AI Use at DOJ, which addressed related questions of executive branch responsiveness to legal constraints.

What remains unknown: the full text of the blocked Postal Service regulations, the case name and docket number of the underlying litigation, the identity of the plaintiffs who sought the injunction, and whether the Department of Justice intends to seek further appellate review. All of those details are contained in the federal court record and the Postal Service's administrative docket, both of which are publicly accessible through PACER and the Federal Register respectively.

Today's Analysis
Loading...
Latest Intelligence
Congressional Intelligence
Loading...
Financial Intelligence
Loading...
Geopolitical Intelligence
Loading...
Follow the MoneyGab-E Political Intelligence Investigation
Loading...
Opinion & Analysis
Loading...
Archive
Loading...
About
Our Mission

We Follow the Data, Not the Narrative

The Congressional Times exists because public records are public — and the analysis built from them should not be exclusive to those who can afford $60,000-a-year intelligence subscriptions.

Every story published in The Congressional Times is sourced to a verifiable public record: a court filing, a Senate lobbying disclosure, an FEC contribution record, a USASpending contract, or a verified news report. We state our sources inline. We show our math. When we are wrong, we say so publicly.

We do not editorialize in news coverage. We do not use loaded language. Both political parties are held to identical standards.

The Follow the Money investigations are the heart of this publication. Each begins with Gab-E Political Intelligence running against 10+ million government records before a single word of editorial is written.

Powered by Gab-E, an elite global intelligence platform built to democratize political and financial intelligence.

Editorial Policy
Editorial Standards & Corrections Policy

How We Source, Verify, and Correct Our Work

Every factual claim in a Congressional Times story is checked against a primary source: a government filing, a court record, a direct quote, before publication. When a claim can't be verified or doesn't hold up as originally reported, we drop it or reframe it. We do not publish disputed claims as settled fact.

When we get it wrong: we correct the story directly, note the correction and date at the bottom of the piece, and update the record. We do not quietly edit and move on.

Bylines: stories with a named byline are written and fact-checked by that person. Stories without a byline are sourced from Gab-E Political Intelligence, our automated research platform, and are labeled as such.

Ownership: The Congressional Times is published by Gab-E Holdings LLC. Gab-E, our intelligence platform, powers our sourcing and research pipeline.

Corrections or concerns: support@gab-e.com