Federal judge puts a halt to changes at post office
WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Washington state Thursday granted a request from 14 states to temporarily block operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service that have been blamed for a slowdown in mail delivery, saying President Donald Trump and Postmaster General Louis Dejoy are “involved in a politically motivated attack” on the agency that could disrupt the 2020 election.
Stanley Bastian, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, said policies put in place under Dejoy “likely will slow down delivery of ballots” this fall, creating a “substantial possibility that many voters will be disenfranchised and the states may not be able to effectively, timely, accurately determine election outcomes.”
“The states have demonstrated that the defendants are involved in a politically motivated attack on the efficiency of the Postal Service,” Bastian said in brief remarks after a twoand-a-half hour hearing in Yakima, Wash. “They have also demonstrated that this attack on the Postal Service is likely to irreparably harm the states’ ability to administer the 2020 general election.”
The ruling, the first major decision to come out of several lawsuits filed by states against the Postal Service, was a victory for Democratic state officials who view Trump’s attacks on mail voting and Dejoy’s operational changes as part of a concerted effort to impede the Nov. 3 vote. Partisan tensions are running high as millions of Americans prepare to cast mail ballots because of the coronavi
rus pandemic, and mail delays have heightened concerns that voters unfamiliar with the process will be disenfranchised.
The scope and duration of the injunction were not immediately clear. Bastian said he would provide more detail in a written order later Thursday or today.
Postal Service spokesman Dave Partenheimer said in a statement that “while we are exploring our legal options, there should be no doubt that the Postal Service is ready and committed to handle whatever volume of election mail it receives. Our No. 1 priority is to deliver election mail on time.”
Added Donald Lee Moak, a Democrat who chairs the election mail committee of the USPS Board of Governors: “Any suggestion that there is a politically motivated attack on the efficiency of the Postal Service is completely and utterly without merit.”
Last month, Dejoy told lawmakers that ensuring the safe and timely delivery of election mail was his “sacred duty,” disputing accusations that changes he put in place were politically motivated. He reiterated his commitment to election mail in a call Thursday with secretaries of states and election officials around the country.
The judge’s decision could produce more tumult within the Postal Service just as states start to send out mail ballots. At least nine states have started proactively sending mail ballot applications or request forms to voters, and by Sunday about 20 states will have started distributing actual ballots through the mail, according to the Washington Post’s 50-state voting guide.
“Changes this close to an election have a cost, and that cost is usually paid in voter confusion,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonprofit, nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research. “What it comes down to is: Can voters rely on the Postal Service getting their ballots to them and getting them to election officials in a reasonable amount of time?”
It is unclear how the court decision will affect mail service in the short term.
The suit, filed by Washington and 13 other states, sought a broad injunction prohibiting the Postal Service from implementing operational changes, distribution center closures, removal of mail sorting machines or any other “change in the nature of postal services which will generally affect service on a nationwide or substantially nationwide basis” until the Postal Regulatory Commission weighs in with an advisory opinion.
Judge Bastian said in court that he will base his preliminary injunction largely on what was sought by the states.
Some policies blamed for delivery delays long have been in place. For example, the Postal Service routinely mothballs sorting machines to cut excess capacity, agency officials have said.
After taking office in May, Dejoy
also instituted new measures he later said were aimed at cutting costs, but postal workers said they led to a curtailing of overtime and mail backlogs.
Concerns about the Postal Service’s ability to handle election mail rose during the summer amid widespread reports of mail delays. Those worries grew acute when the Postal Service sent detailed letters to 46 states and the District of Columbia warning it could not guarantee that mail ballots would arrive in time to be counted in November.
Days later, 21 states cited concerns about the election as they announced that they planned to file several lawsuits over Dejoy’s operational changes.
Washington’s suit was joined by Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin.
In a complaint filed Aug. 18, the group argued that the Postal Service acted outside its authority by making operational changes without seeking an advisory opinion from the Postal Regulatory Commission, an independent agency with broad power to review the Postal Service’s policies and performance.
By pursuing an operational shake-up the summer before the election, the Postal Service also interfered with states’ constitutionally mandated role in setting the “time, place and manner” of elections, the states argued.
Kristin Beneski, an assistant attorney
general for Washington state, told the court that one of the changes involved instructing letter carriers to leave mail behind if it would slow down the delivery process.
“Most significantly, Postmaster Dejoy himself testified to Congress that he was responsible for this policy and that this policy was a direct cause of the delays we’ve seen,” she said.
A lawyer for the federal government argued that the Postal Service is prepared to handle the crush of election mail and that delivery delays from the summer have abated.
“The practices it has always had in place are designed to move this mail” quickly, said Joseph Borson, trial attorney with the Justice Department, adding that the Postal Service understands its responsibility to the public during election season.
Borson also told the court that the agency’s warning to states was not unusual and that a similar warning was issued before the 2016 general election.
Amid building public outcry over the mail delays, Dejoy announced last month that he was suspending several policies “to avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail,” including the removal of public collection boxes and sorting machines.
He said the Postal Service would not cut post office retail hours or workers’ overtime hours and that mail processing equipment and collection boxes would “remain where they are.”