Democrats challenge postmaster general on legality of USPS monitoring mail-in ballots

[Doc7505]

Democrats challenge postmaster general on legality of USPS monitoring mail-in ballots​

Democrats challenge postmaster general on legality of USPS monitoring mail-in ballots

Postmaster General David Steiner told a congressional panel Wednesday that under President Trump’s mandate requiring states to provide lists of voters who received mailed ballots, the Postal Service won’t deliver ballots in states where officials refuse to comply.

www.washingtontimes.com

24 Jun 2026 ~~ By Mary McCue Bell

Postmaster General David Steiner told a congressional panel Wednesday that under President Trump’s mandate requiring states to provide lists of voters who received mailed ballots, the Postal Service won’t deliver ballots in states where officials refuse to comply.
Democrats on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs slammed this as unconstitutional, saying that Congress, not the president, has the power to determine how the mail operates.
Following Mr. Trump’s executive order directing USPS to begin rule-making on mail-in and absentee ballot services, the agency proposed rules requiring states to submit lists of voters receiving mail-in or absentee ballots.
Several years ago, the USPS began recommending Kit 600, which includes a unique barcode and envelope tied to outbound and return ballot envelopes. The proposed rule would formally codify these guidelines to “help determine adherence to federal law and facilitate law enforcement efforts.”
Historically, USPS recommended but could not enforce mail-in ballot standards. The proposed rule would make those standards mandatory, with non-compliant ballots returned to senders.
The public has until July 2 to comment on ⁠the proposal before the Trump administration can finalize it.
Michigan Sen. Gary Peters, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the administration’s effort to “nationalize elections” and give the federal government such information is an “incredibly dangerous precedent.”

Commentary:
Democrats know their game of fraud and theft to turn elections will be defeated if they can’t control the mail in ballots, so they’ll do anything, anything to stop the needed changes for free, fair and legal elections. Lenin and Stalin would be proud of their continuing efforts.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The Postmaster General has no legal authority to withhold delivering the mail. They do not get to throw a temper tantrum just because a judge rightfully struck down an illegal Executive Order by the president. The president is not a king.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

I say that mail in ballots should be certified mail and the the person who signs for it must show their ID.

 

[JGalt]

The Postmaster General has no legal authority to withhold delivering the mail. They do not get to throw a temper tantrum just because a judge rightfully struck down an illegal Executive Order by the president. The president is not a king.

Wrong. The Postmaster General and the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) have the legal authority to withhold mail delivery in specific, strictly defined circumstances. Under 39 U.S.C. § 3005, the USPS can withhold delivery of mail suspected of being part of a fraudulent scheme, lottery, or gift enterprise. Also under Under 39 CFR Part 964, the Chief Postal Inspector may initiate administrative withholdings for suspected unlawful activities, which could include fraudulent ballots.

The Post Office is a government contractor. It would certainly behoove them to comply with a POTUS EO.

 

[Sayaras]

 

[IM2]

View attachment 1273042

That's not the topic.

 

[Muhammed]

The Postmaster General has no legal authority to withhold delivering the mail.

Yes they do.

 

[jacksonlamb]

The courts will tie up this monstrosity of an idea.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The Postmaster General has no legal authority to withhold delivering the mail. They do not get to throw a temper tantrum just because a judge rightfully struck down an illegal Executive Order by the president. The president is not a king.

the postal insp as far as i know are the only ones who can do that....at least it was that way when i was delivering mail...but that was because of suspected criminal activity....otherwise if its a good address it gets delivered...

 

[Harry Dresden]

I say that mail in ballots should be certified mail and the the person who signs for it must show their ID.

you dont show id for certified....registered yes....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Yes they do.

it has to be a good reason like rules being broken....and then the inspectors take over...

 

[WorldWatcher]

[Public Service Announcement to US Voters]

Stop by Office Depot.

Pick up a plain yellow mailing envelope.

Complete your mail in ballot as normal. Secure it in the security envelope as normal.

Then insert in the plan yellow envelope, apply the proper postage, then mail it.

Mail early so as not to run into problems with timing.

Since it's not the normal ballot envelope the USPS will have no authorization not to deliver your mail.

Thank me later.

WW

[/Public Service Announcement to US Voters]

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

you dont show id for certified....registered yes....

I did check that issue before I posted that statement.

Yes, USPS Certified Mail always requires a signature upon delivery, either from the recipient or an authorized person at the delivery address.​

Signature Requirements​

Certified Mail cannot be left unattended in a mailbox. The USPS carrier collects a signature before releasing the item. Anyone at the delivery address can sign, such as a family member, roommate, coworker, receptionist, or office manager, unless the sender adds Restricted Delivery, which limits signing to the specific named recipient legalclarity.org+2.

Proof of Signature​

While Certified Mail confirms that the item was delivered or an attempt was made, the sender does not automatically receive a copy of the signature. To obtain legally valid proof of who signed, the sender must purchase a Return Receipt service. This can be either a physical “Green Card” (PS Form 3811) or an electronic PDF, both of which are accepted in legal proceedings legalclarity.org+1.

Delivery Attempts​

If no one is available to sign, USPS leaves a PS Form 3849 redelivery notice. The recipient can either pick up the item at the local post office within 15 days or schedule a redelivery. If unclaimed, the item is returned to the sender legalclarity.org+2.

Additional Notes​

• Certified Mail is commonly used for legal notices, contracts, and tax documents due to its tracking and signature verification features theletterpilot.com.
• USPS maintains electronic records of signatures for several years, providing a reliable chain of evidence for important mailings certifiedmaillabels.com.
• For sensitive documents, Restricted Delivery ensures only the named recipient can sign, adding an extra layer of security theletterpilot.com.
  In summary, Certified Mail always requires a signature, but to receive proof of who signed, the sender must add a Return Receipt service. This makes it a secure and legally recognized method for sending important documents.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I did check that issue before I posted that statement.

Yes, USPS Certified Mail always requires a signature upon delivery, either from the recipient or an authorized person at the delivery address.​

Signature Requirements​

Certified Mail cannot be left unattended in a mailbox. The USPS carrier collects a signature before releasing the item. Anyone at the delivery address can sign, such as a family member, roommate, coworker, receptionist, or office manager, unless the sender adds Restricted Delivery, which limits signing to the specific named recipient legalclarity.org+2.

Proof of Signature​

While Certified Mail confirms that the item was delivered or an attempt was made, the sender does not automatically receive a copy of the signature. To obtain legally valid proof of who signed, the sender must purchase a Return Receipt service. This can be either a physical “Green Card” (PS Form 3811) or an electronic PDF, both of which are accepted in legal proceedings legalclarity.org+1.

Delivery Attempts​

If no one is available to sign, USPS leaves a PS Form 3849 redelivery notice. The recipient can either pick up the item at the local post office within 15 days or schedule a redelivery. If unclaimed, the item is returned to the sender legalclarity.org+2.

Additional Notes​

• Certified Mail is commonly used for legal notices, contracts, and tax documents due to its tracking and signature verification features theletterpilot.com.
• USPS maintains electronic records of signatures for several years, providing a reliable chain of evidence for important mailings certifiedmaillabels.com.
• For sensitive documents, Restricted Delivery ensures only the named recipient can sign, adding an extra layer of security theletterpilot.com.
  In summary, Certified Mail always requires a signature, but to receive proof of who signed, the sender must add a Return Receipt service. This makes it a secure and legally recognized method for sending important documents.

we hardly ever asked for ID's for certified UNLESS its stated that only the addresses can sign for it...

 

[Moonglow]

View attachment 1273042

Get lost, wrong thread.

 

[jacksonlamb]

Follow all the rules for mail-in voting and mail it in a manilla envelope to the right address.

 

[Oddball]

the postal insp as far as i know are the only ones who can do that....at least it was that way when i was delivering mail...but that was because of suspected criminal activity....otherwise if its a good address it gets delivered...

You mean like operating under the auspices of the USPS to deliver fraudulent ballots across state lines?...Or maybe like private contractors in unmarked vehicles, not the USPS, delivering "mailed" ballots?

 

[jacksonlamb]

You mean like operating under the auspices of the USPS to deliver fraudulent ballots across state lines?...Or maybe like private contractors in unmarked vehicles, not the USPS, delivering "mailed" ballots?

Nothing of the sort. The mail is the mail. Mail-in ballots cannot be presumed to be fraudulent. That's libel.

 

[Oddball]

Nothing of the sort. The mail is the mail. Mail-in ballots cannot be presumed to be fraudulent. That's libel.

 

[jacksonlamb]

View attachment 1273185

Compared to^, you have nothing, Cletus.