Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
A U.S. District Court judge calls delays in Election Day ballot delivery resulting from U.S. Postal Service policy changes “profound” and “troubling.”
The opinion, filed Monday, is the latest development in a lawsuit against the Trump administration over ballot delivery.
The lawsuit claims the U.S. Postal Service, under the direction of Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, has enacted policies delaying ballot delivery, violating First and Fifth Amendment protections and endangering Election Day results.
Judge Victor Marrero agreed with those claims in his opinion, asserting the plaintiffs identified “institutional confusion in Postal Service communications, operations, and practices” that “can serve no legitimate purpose.”
“The Court is left with little reason to believe that the USPS policy and operational picture will be any clearer for postal employees as the November election approaches,” Judge Marrero said in his opinion.
The order granted injunctive relief to the plaintiffs, who include voters from California, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
The lawsuit claims the U.S. Postal Service “has retreated from the dedication to its institutional ethic and historical culture of delivering mail” when it implemented changes proposed by its new postmaster, DeJoy.
The so-called “transformative initiative” DeJoy implemented shortly after assuming the postmaster role has resulted in these ballot delays, the plaintiffs allege, jeopardizing Election Day results.
“Under this approach, according to Plaintiffs, the Postal Service’s commitment to delivering all of the mail may be sacrificed in the name of efficiency.”
These changes included reduction of overtime pay, hiring freezes and a rule banning late or extra trips “even if deliveries weren’t fully completed.”
In addition, mail sorting machines were eliminated altogether “on a larger scale than previously done since 2016,” according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs point to examples of ballot delivery getting sorted as marketing mail, not First Class as is done traditionally.
Specifically, the lawsuit cites a San Antonio mail-sorting facility currently running two to three days behind on Election Day mail delivery due to these practices.
Furthermore, at this same facility, mail processing clerk Jose Carlos Barrios said “a quarter” of election mailings were missed in initial sortings.
While DeJoy cites these moves as cost-saving measures, Judge Marrero disagreed, asserting the “Postal Service’s status as a symbol of national unity must be validated by the demonstrated degree of its commitment to utmost effectiveness of Election Mail service.”
These moves by the U.S. Postal Service are further “complicated,” the plaintiffs said, when considering President Donald Trump’s deputy campaign manager Justin Clark has been quoted as saying the “President views vote by mail as a threat to his election.”
Mixed in with this current election is the threat of a deadly virus, the lawsuit further asserts, alleging the U.S. Postal Service should be doing more when it comes to ballot delivery, not less.
Twenty-two states have implemented mail-in ballot delivery in lieu of in-person voting on Election Day because of the coronavirus, according to the lawsuit.
Plaintiffs say “there is no dispute” this pandemic will cause “a significant surge” in ballot delivery.
“Rather than focusing efforts and resources on guaranteeing that citizens’ apprehensions about the coronavirus crisis would not impede exercise of their right to vote,” the plaintiffs said, “the Postal Service, the Postmaster General, and the President have made public statements and taken steps manifesting a somewhat ambiguous course.”
Since DeJoy’s policy changes, on-time rates for First Class mail have fallen, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit further asserts delivery rates for First Class mail have yet to recover since DeJoy’s changes.
“The crisis demands … extraordinary measures and firm commitment to ensure that all citizens wishing to exercise their right to vote are able to do so without needing to confront an untenable choice: risk contracting a potentially fatal illness by voting in person, or foregoing [sic] their right to vote in a presidential election.”
The plaintiff’s motion for injunction was granted in part by Judge Marrero, with direction to amend their complaint, saying the requests for relief were “too vague to be permissible.”
Have you experienced delays in early ballot delivery? Let us know in the comments below.
Counsel representing the plaintiffs in this case are J. Remy Green, Elena Cohen, Jessica Massimi and Jonathan Wallace of Cohen & Green PLLC and Ali Najmi of the Law Office of Ali Najmi.
The Voting By Mail Lawsuit is Mondaire Jones, et al. v. United States Postal Service, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-06516, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
NAACP Election Lawsuit Says USPS Changes Aim to Disenfranchise Voters of Color
Kanye West Cannot Appear on Arizona Ballot, Judge Rules
Do You Need Long Term Disability for Parkinson’s Disease?
E-Cigarette JUUL Side Effects: Heart & Lung Lawsuit Investigation
