Trump wants to ban mail-in ballots before the 2026 midterms. Can he do that?
President Donald Trump has said that he wants to end mail-in voting, a popular option that's been embraced by tens of millions of voters nationwide.
The Republican president said an executive order is already in the works to make that a reality — even though he doesn't have the authority to do that under the U.S. Constitution.
"We, as a Republican Party, are going to do everything possible that we get rid of mail-in ballots ," Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last week. "We're going to start with an executive order that's being written right now by the best lawyers in the country to end mail-in ballots."
Trump's comments were an amplification of a longer post to his Truth Social site , last week, where he said he planned to eliminate "Highly 'Inaccurate,' Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES, which cost Ten Times more than accurate and sophisticated Watermark Paper, which is faster, and leaves NO DOUBT, at the end of the evening, as to who WON, and who LOST, the Election."
The president's comments about voting machines also came on the same day that the right-leaning Newsmax network a greed to pay $67 million to settle a lawsuit over claims it made about voting machines.
In that same post, Trump also argued that the United States is the "only country in the world that uses Mail-In Voting. All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED."
The opposite is true. Thirty-four countries around the world allow for some form of mail-in balloting, which is referred to as "postal voting," according to a report by Sweden-based International IDEA, which supports democracy worldwide.
Trump also missed the mark on voting machines.
"There is no evidence the machines are inaccurate. And while the president continued to call for paper ballots, that's already the norm in nearly every state," according to an analysis by FactCheck.org .
So, can Trump ban mail-in balloting and voting machines?
Massachusetts Secretary of State Bill Galvin, who oversees elections in the Bay State, cut right to the chase.
"Well, he can't," Galvin told MassLive, noting that the state already has taken Trump to court to challenge the White House's efforts to constrain voting rights.
"He has no authority, unilaterally, to prevent people from voting by mail, or states from allowing their citizens to vote by mail," Galvin, a Boston Democrat, said. "He may want to pursue legislation, which, obviously, we would oppose, and I think most intelligent people would. But, he, by himself, cannot do that."
And there's a pretty simple reason for that: Under the Constitution, only the states and Congress have the power to regulate elections.
It's right there in Article I, Section 4 of the nation's foundational document:
"The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing ( sic ) Senators.
There's no role for the president in the process, Michael Waldman, the president and CEO of The Brennan Center, posted on Bluesky last Monday .
And any attempt to ban mail-in voting is an "appalling attack on free and fair election[s]," Waldman continued.
UCLA Law School professor Rick Hasen sees things much the same way, noting that Trump's Truth Social post makes the argument that "states are merely an 'agent' of the federal government in counting and tabulating the votes.
"This is wrong and dangerous," Hasen wrote in a post to The Election Law Blog . "The Constitution does not give the President any control over federal elections. Federal courts have recognized this in the context of his first EO on elections issued months ago — and part put on hold through preliminary injunctions."
What's the deal in Massachusetts?
Massachusetts first implemented mail-in voting in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2022, state lawmakers and then-Gov. Charlie Baker enshrined it in law .
"It was very challenging administratively to put that together," Galvin said of the state's first run at mail-in voting in 2020. "But we did it, and it was very successful and very popular."
The state logged a record turnout of 1.4 million people in the 2020 Democratic primary, Galvin noted. State Republicans opted for mail-in voting for subsequent elections, even as Trump inveighed against it, he added.
"But even they have recognized it's an opportunity for them to participate [in the process]," he said.
Just about a third of voters (34%) opted for mail-in ballots in the 2024 general election, Galvin said.
But Trump also has some company in Massachusetts.
Among the dozens of proposed 2026 ballot measures submitted to state Attorney General Andrea Campbell is a proposal to scrap universal mail-in balloting and return to absentee balloting only, which is more limited.
Is it safe?
Galvin told MassLive that criticisms of mail-in voting, which voters have embraced for its convenience, have been neutralized by the state's own experiences.
"It's been tested by the fact that it's been not only [used in] numerous elections, but these are adversarial elections where there have been a number of close races where people had a chance, with legal representation to review the ballots, both Democrats [and] Republicans," Galvin said. "And [they could] obviously challenge ballots if they felt there was some irregularity. And they haven't done it because it isn't there to challenge."
An analysis by FactCheck.org concluded that "while fraud is slightly more prevalent with mail-in voting than in-person voting, it is still relatively rare, and there is no evidence to support claims of widespread fraud."
What's next?
But even if the law and the facts don't support Trump's arguments, some voter watchdogs are urging vigilance.
"The danger of interference in the midterm elections is real, and this is a dangerous step in this direction," Hasen wrote in his blog post.
"The timing may be connected to trying to distract from the debacle of the Russia-Ukraine war negotiations, but I was expecting more like this, and now is the time to be prepared," Hasen wrote.
Galvin offered a similar sentiment.
"My personal view of this latest episode is he's looking for any distraction from the realities of governing, namely his complete fiasco in Alaska [with Russian President Vladimir Putin]," he said. "Beyond that, the uncertainty of the economy with his tariff policy. And lastly, of course, the release of the Epstein papers , which he seems to be preoccupied about."
More on Politics
Read the original article on MassLive .
