This week, the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration’s plans to impose new rules for mail-in voting for the midterm elections in November. 

In a March executive order, President Donald Trump had instructed the U.S. Postal Service to create rules for election officials sending mail-in ballots to voters. If a state didn’t comply with the new rules, the Postal Service wouldn’t deliver the ballots to voters. State officials said it would have been impossible to comply in time, and two federal judges blocked the rule for the November elections. Lawyers for the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene.

In a brief, unsigned order on Monday, the court’s majority denied the administration’s request, writing that the “Government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge.” Justice Samuel Alito wrote an eight-page dissent, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, saying he would have allowed the rules to go into effect. The court has not yet decided whether the rules can move forward after the November election.

Trump criticized the Supreme Court’s order in a Truth Social post on Tuesday, calling it “a big loss for Republicans, and America itself.”

The result of the Supreme Court order is that nothing has changed for states. 

“State and local election administrators all across the country will continue to do what they always do, which is run safe, secure and transparent elections,” said Barbara Smith Warner, a senior adviser for the Institute for Responsive Government, a think tank working on election issues. “Everyone can and should be sure that they can vote in this election.”

We’ve been reporting for months on the Trump administration’s efforts to issue new regulations on mail-in voting, gather state voter data and investigate voter eligibility ahead of the November elections. We spoke with experts on mail-in voting to answer practical questions about voting by mail.

Why is Trump trying to restrict mail-in voting?

Mail-in voting has become more common over the decades. Roughly a third of Americans cast their ballots through the mail nowadays, according to the Brookings Institute. Trump himself voted by mail twice this year. But mail-in voting varies dramatically from state to state. While more than 95% of voters cast their ballots by mail in Oregon and Washington state, which have all-mail elections, less than 3% of voters vote by mail in West Virginia and Tennessee.

Trump has attacked mail-in voting for years, calling it “cheating” and “corrupt.” And as Trump has tried to exert more federal control over elections, he’s also sought to impose new restrictions on mail-in voting and voter eligibility. The president has claimed, without evidence, that voting by noncitizens is rampant. He’s pushed Congress to create stricter voter identification requirements, and with legislation stalled on Capitol Hill, he set out to regulate mail-in voting through an executive order.

White House spokesperson Olivia Wales said in a statement that the president wants “commonsense exceptions” for Americans to vote by mail because of an illness, a disability, travel or service in the military. And she said Trump’s use of mail-in ballots to participate in Florida elections while living in the White House “is a nonstory.” But “universal mail-in voting should not be allowed because it’s highly susceptible to fraud,” she added.

Studies have consistently found voter fraud is exceedingly rare. 

What did the USPS rule say?

Trump’s order instructed the Postal Service to set criteria for mail-in ballots. The USPS finalized the rule in August. If it went into effect, the Postal Service wouldn’t mail ballots for states that failed to comply. 

The USPS rule set design standards that required envelopes for mail-in ballots to include the official election mail logo and a unique bar code. States were required to upload lists of their eligible voters’ names and mailing addresses to a portal that’s still being built. (On Sept. 1, the Postal Service said the portal would be available soon.) The bar codes on the envelopes needed to match the voter information in the lists states uploaded to the portal. If the ballot envelope failed to fit the criteria, USPS would reject and return the mail to election officials.

In August, an anonymous federal employee filed a whistleblower disclosure with U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, calling the Postal Service’s new system untested and error-prone. The employee described the process as “secretive, rushed, chaotic, and fundamentally flawed.”

According to a September audit by the agency’s Office of Inspector General, some Postal Service facilities failed to properly handle ballots during this year’s primary elections. (In a response included with the findings of the audit, USPS wrote that “overall ballot mail performance is strong,” while acknowledging “we can always reinforce and amplify our internal processes and procedures.”) As ProPublica’s Jen Fifield reported, top USPS officials expressed concerns in meetings about how the new rules could delay or block ballots from reaching large swaths of eligible voters. 

The rule change would’ve affected the people who rely on mail-in voting the most: older people, people with certain disabilities, and people who live in remote or rural areas, said Richard Hasen, a UCLA law professor and director of the school’s Safeguarding Democracy Project, in an interview before the Supreme Court order. On Sept. 3, a bipartisan group of 99 current and former state and local election officials said in a court brief that it would have been impossible for states to comply with the rules ahead of the midterms.

The Trump administration said in its filing to the Supreme Court that the Postal Service rule “imposes only modest envelope-design and addressee-information requirements” on mail-in ballots.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Postal Service did not respond to a request for comment. In a previous statement, a spokesperson said the agency had spent months developing its system, in a manner consistent with federal court orders. The spokesperson added that the agency’s goal is to ensure “that Americans can have confidence that their election mail will be handled securely and delivered reliably.” In response to concerns raised by the whistleblower, Postmaster General David Steiner said in a statement that the agency “takes these concerns seriously” but added that “our standards for quality, security, and system integrity were not compromised.”

In a concurring opinion with this week’s decision blocking the new mail-in ballot rules, Justice Brett Kavanaugh acknowledged that state and local election officials didn’t have enough time to implement the Postal Service changes before the November midterms. But Kavanaugh added that the rules may fall within the Postal Service’s authority, not ruling out that they could be implemented for future elections. 

Can I vote by mail?

State laws vary on who can vote by mail, and when. Your eligibility depends on the law in your state.

Every state offers some version of voting by mail, but your state may require you to have a reason to vote absentee, such as an illness, a disability or travel out of state. 

Check the rules for mail-in voting in your state. Take note of whether your state requires you to request a mail-in ballot ahead of the election and what the deadlines are for those requests, as well as when ballots must be returned in order to count. Before you request a mail-in ballot, make sure you’re registered to vote and the local election office has your address.

Eight states and the District of Columbia proactively mail ballots to every registered voter. In 29 states, voters can request a mail-in ballot without providing a reason. The other 13 states require voters to provide an eligible excuse when they ask for an absentee ballot.

How do I make sure my mail-in ballot counts?

We asked experts what voters should know if they plan to vote by mail. Keep in mind that the rules for mail-in voting depend on where you live.  

Read the directions carefully, Smith Warner said. Make sure you fill out the ballot completely and don’t leave any stray marks.

Sign the ballot with your typical signature. Use the same signature you have on other government documents, such as your driver’s license, experts say. That signature is printed on your license, and you can pull it out to refresh your memory.

Don’t miss the deadline to turn in your ballot. Deadlines for turning in absentee ballots vary by state. The U.S. Postal Service recommends voters mail their completed ballot at least a week before their state’s deadline to ensure it arrives in time. 

The Postal Service’s routes may have changed, so delivery of your mail-in ballot may take longer, said Tammy Patrick, the chief programs officer at the Election Center. “So, make sure you get your ballot back as early as possible,” she said.

Consider dropping off your ballot at a local election office. Election experts we spoke to recommend voters return their completed ballots to a ballot drop box or their local election office. Drop boxes are often found at city halls, libraries and schools. Check with your local election office to find locations near you.

Track your ballot. State and local election officials often have online portals where you can check to see whether your ballot has been received, approved or rejected. 

What if I change my mind and prefer to vote in person?

It’s not unusual for people to vote at the polls after requesting a mail-in ballot, said David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, a nonpartisan nonprofit based in Washington that works with election officials and conducts research to build trust in the voting process. States have systems in place to prevent people from voting twice.

Some states allow voters to bring completed mail-in ballots to polling places, but check with your local election office before relying on that method. If you decide you want to vote in person instead, experts recommend you bring your mail ballot and envelope so the poll workers can cancel or spoil it (mark it or rip it up).

We also asked experts what to do if a voter has already sent in their mail-in ballot but wants to make changes. Experts said to avoid this if possible. Depending on where you live, if the mail-in ballot hasn’t yet been accepted and cast by election officials, voters may be able to change their mind and vote in person, Patrick said.

“As long as it hasn’t gotten back to the elections office and it hasn’t been accepted,” she said, “then the voter can usually still be provided another ballot.”

The post What to Know About Mail-In Voting for the 2026 Midterms appeared first on ProPublica.

Samantha Ramos stood at the front of her second grade classroom, a small mic clipped to her lanyard amplifying her instructions as she began a phonics lesson.

“Can we get our arms ready?” asked Ramos, who’s taught at the John B. Wright Elementary School in Tucson, Arizona, for 15 years. She brought her right palm to her left shoulder as the students imitated her movements.

Ramos, who specializes in teaching English as a second language, was leading a lesson that day on the short “i” sound. She told the students to pronounce each letter with a different gesture — touching the shoulder for the “w,” the elbow for the “i” and the hand for the double “l” — before sounding out the word “will.” They repeated the process for other short “i” words — “dig,” “wig” and “fit.”

The lesson is part of a daily block of language instruction, ranging from two to four hours long, that Arizona students learning English as a second language are required to take. The students, most of them Spanish-speaking Latino children, remain in the program, separated for part of that time from their peers whose primary language is English, until they pass a test showing they’re fluent enough to learn in a mainstream classroom.

The program is known as “structured English immersion,” or colloquially as “English-only” because all instruction is required to be in English. This limits their time for core subjects, like math and science, that are critical to academic success and college readiness. Arizona is the only state with English-only laws still in effect for its public schools.

But the number of students enrolled in the curriculum has tumbled dramatically this year. At the Tucson Unified School District, where Ramos teaches, the percentage of test-taking students who scored high enough to be classified as proficient in English more than doubled — from 10% in 2025 to 24% in 2026.

Rather than a big leap in fluency, however, the test results reflect the Arizona Department of Education lowering the grade needed to pass. The changes were approved by outgoing Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, a longtime Republican defender of Arizona’s English-only policies.

Experts warn this change will do lasting harm to tens of thousands of Arizona students who will exit the structured English immersion program before they know the language well enough to succeed. Such students are already part of the lowest-performing group on standardized tests, and the loss of specialized instruction could further harm their long-term academic success, according to education researchers.

Past attempts by the Arizona Department of Education to reclassify large numbers of children learning English as fluent prompted federal investigations by the departments of Justice and Education. Federal officials contended placing such students in classrooms where they struggled because they lacked knowledge of English violated their civil and educational rights, and Arizona agreed to a settlement more than a decade ago.

What’s happening now could be a repeat of that, said Katie Bernstein, an applied linguist and professor of early childhood education at Arizona State University.

“If you’re put in a class where you don’t understand what’s going on at all, you’re not learning language or content,” she said. “And so those are the worst outcomes of all, are students who are not given any language services.”

---

Nearly 1 in 10 students enrolled in Arizona public and charter schools marked in their school registration forms they speak a language other than English at home. State law mandates that they be assessed for fluency and placed in structured English immersion, and each spring they take the Arizona English Language Learner Assessment, or AZELLA, to measure their progress in reading, writing, speaking and listening.

This approach has been required since Arizona voters passed a 2000 ballot initiative, Proposition 203, banning bilingual education in public schools. Still, officials have periodically made changes to the proficiency test.

The U.S. departments of Justice and Education determined the version of AZELLA administered between 2006 and 2012 — coinciding with Horne’s first two terms as the state’s top education official — was “not a valid measure of English language proficiency and readiness.” As a result, the state had removed at least 28,000 students from structured English immersion who still lacked proficiency in reading and writing the language.

The Arizona Department of Education was found to be in violation of civil rights laws that ban discrimination on the basis of race and national origin by schools that receive federal funds. The state voluntarily entered a settlement, which stressed that the law requires “education agencies to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede students’ equal participation in instructional programs.”

The settlement agreement stipulated that the state would immediately help school districts find the students who had been harmed and offer “reading and writing intervention services.” In the long term, the state was required to revamp the AZELLA test.

Similar issues prompted a second voluntary settlement four years later, which instructed the state to raise the threshold for a test score to qualify as proficient in English. The state was also required to retest English-language learners using more rigorous standards, among other things.

Ida Rose Florez, a psychologist and former professor and researcher at Arizona State University, conducted a study published in 2012 that found the AZELLA test was “ineffective and obsolete” and its results could be arbitrary. The research concluded there was no evidence the test could “accurately differentiate” between children who need English-language services and those who don’t.

“What I examined, and what I saw, was a test that was absolutely not developed correctly,” Florez told Arizona Luminaria and ProPublica. “I don’t see any basis for validity whatsoever.”

After dropping during the pandemic, AZELLA passing rates held steady at 12% statewide for three school years, including in 2025, when more than 118,000 took the test and just over 14,000 scored well enough to be reclassified as proficient.

After the Arizona Department of Education lowered the score needed to pass the test, the statewide reclassification rate for 2026 jumped to 26%, according to the department’s official tally announced to teachers at a September training. Nearly 113,000 students took the 2026 AZELLA, according to the department, resulting in the reclassification of about 30,000 students as proficient and their removal from English-language services this school year.

---

The state Department of Education said its decision to make it easier to pass the AZELLA came after it administered the test last year to 600 native English speakers.

Each new version of the test is given to native speakers first and the results are used as a baseline, said Deputy Superintendent Margaret Dugan, who chaired the group that advocated for passage of Proposition 203 and has served with Horne during all three of his terms as superintendent.

The department skipped this step in 2020, when it made the last major change to the test, following a State Board of Education decision granting more flexibility in how schools teach students English. “Because of COVID and all of that that went on in 2020, things were not done in order,” Dugan said. “When we walked in, it was a new test and they had never tested the native speakers, so now they had to.”

When that version was belatedly administered to native English speakers, nearly half failed, said Adela Santa Cruz, who leads the Office of English Language Acquisition, which oversees the test. “With a native not being able to pass that test at a high percentage, there’s something that was just quite awry,” she said.

She said the issues were reflected in the pass rate of English learners plateauing at 12% for three years.

Using this information, education officials adjusted the grading criteria for students learning English, requiring a lower score to pass all four portions of the test: reading, writing, speaking and listening. Previously, all students needed a combined score of at least 1,000 out of a possible 1,405 to pass. This year, the minimum passing score for all grade levels ranged from 962 for high schoolers to 944 for kindergartners.

“My hope is that all of you will see an increase in proficiency,” Anju Kuriakose, the director of psychometrics at the Arizona Department of Education, told school district representatives upon announcing the changes in April.

Kuriakose noted half of the native speakers who had been tested to inform the changes were in kindergarten and first grade. Students in fifth grade or higher accounted for less than one-fifth of test takers.

Florez’s 2012 study found that when scoring guidelines are based too heavily on the test results of native-speaking kindergartners — without enough data from older children with more advanced language skills — pass results can be artificially elevated. She sees similar problems with the 2026 changes.

The Arizona Department of Education said Horne, who approved the changes, was unavailable for an interview. But he has played an outsize role in the state’s structured English immersion program. 

This is Horne’s third nonconsecutive term as superintendent, having served from 2003 to 2011 before returning to the office in 2023. In a 2024 interview with Arizona Luminaria, he boasted that students’ reclassification rates were highest during his terms from 2003 to 2011. “After I left office, things deteriorated,” he said. “I implemented structured English immersion, and equally important, undertook intensive training for the teachers as to how to do it, and then we got it” — the reclassification rate — “up to 31% in three or four years,” he said.

The Arizona auditor general, however, questioned the validity of the test’s results during Horne’s tenure. An audit released in 2011 found that “because data is either unavailable or unreliable, the effect of SEI models is unknown.”

Horne lost his bid for reelection in July’s Republican primary and will leave office in December.

---

Juana Casas was relieved when her son Arturo, a fourth grader at Tucson’s John B. Wright Elementary School, passed the AZELLA test this spring after three years in structured English immersion classes.

Casas said she learned from the experience of her oldest daughter, who had struggled to learn English and fell behind her classmates. She and her husband sought after-school tutoring to help Arturo, and his two older sisters helped him learn English at home.

“I couldn’t help my oldest daughter, and she really struggled,” Casas said in Spanish. “Their two experiences are totally different. Arturo doesn’t speak Spanish very well because they’ve always spoken to him just in English so that he wouldn’t have to struggle like my oldest struggled.”

English learners already lag far behind their peers, resulting in lower rates of graduation and postsecondary attainment. In 2025, standardized reading tests administered to all Arizona third graders showed a 31% disparity between English-language learners and other students, according to the Center for the Future of Arizona’s Education Progress Meter. The standardized math exam administered to all Arizona eighth graders in 2025 showed a 23% disparity between English-language learners and other students.

Since Proposition 203 was debated 26 years ago, proponents have argued it helps students learn English more quickly and gets them into mainstream classes faster. There is limited research to support this. Ample studies, however, show students taught under English-only policies have bigger achievement gaps compared to students instructed using bilingual or multilingual education, which reinforces the student’s primary language while accelerating their learning in academic subjects and a second language.

A landmark 32-year study spanning 16 states analyzed various language-learning models, including structured English immersion, and found that “the key to accelerated progress is for English learners to receive peer-equivalent, grade-level bilingual schooling,” according to researchers Virginia Collier and Wayne Thomas.

Florez, the former ASU professor who studied Arizona’s model, said, “The fundamental problem with the AZELLA is that it’s trying to measure a system that should never be in place to begin with.”

Bernstein, the ASU early childhood education professor, said, “There is no linguistic, educational, economic, or research-based reason why we shouldn’t have dual-language programs in the state. And so I think that potentially leaves politics as the only answer to why.”

With more students passing this year’s proficiency test, the Tucson Unified School District is preparing to continue supporting students like Arturo within the mandates approved by voters in 2000.

Patricia Sandoval-Taylor, the district’s director for language development, said state law requires teachers to track reclassified students’ progress in their classrooms for two years and intervene with additional support like tutoring or summer school if needed. Arizona schools don’t receive additional funding for such services, as they do for students who are not proficient in English.

And since part of the district’s funding for English learners is based on the number of students in structured English immersion, more students passing the 2026 AZELLA will mean less funding in the 2027 school year.

“They’re not going to have the direct services to ensure they become fully English proficient,” Sandoval-Taylor said.

At John B. Wright Elementary, Ramos is still getting to know her second graders’ abilities and adjusting her teaching methods accordingly.

Teaching students who are learning English comes with additional responsibilities but no additional pay. Still, Ramos believes it’s where she can make the biggest difference. For her, that includes celebrating when students pass AZELLA and are classified as proficient in English.

“I think they need to be celebrated because they’re going above and beyond,” she said. “Before they did the change to the cut scores, it was like, ‘Well they passed this really incredibly difficult test that even English speakers couldn’t even pass themselves.’”

The post Arizona Lowered the Bar for Its English Fluency Test. Experts Say It Will Harm Students in the Long Run. appeared first on ProPublica.