The Postal Service must put all election mail in its first class and priority categories and preapprove overtime for postal workers, a judge said Monday, granting injunctive relief sought by voters. (AP Photo/Richard Vogel)
The voters showed their ability to vote on time could be irreparably harmed absent injunctive relief, and also demonstrated the likelihood that their suit claiming violations of free speech and equal protection would likely succeed on the merits, Judge Marrero wrote in his opinion. The jurist sympathized with the USPS hurdles, both political and pandemic-related, but also emphasized its duty during an election that is likely to yield high voter turnout.
"The Court fully understands that the Postal Service's operations face an exceptional test during the impending national election. But now, more than ever, 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," Judge Marrero wrote.
"And while the Court has no doubts that the Postal Service's workforce comprises hardworking and dedicated public servants, multiple managerial failures have undermined the postal employees' ability to fulfill their vital mission," the opinion continued.
The injunctive relief applies to the voters' claims against the USPS and Postmaster General Louis DeJoy. However, Judge Marrero stopped short in granting the motion with respect to claims against the president, acknowledging case law showing that presidents are insulated from declaratory relief.
While he expressed "doubts as to the accuracy" of that argument, Judge Marrero noted that he needn't decide that matter since that injunctive relief is available against DeJoy and the USPS.
The judge's opinion came with an order that the USPS must place all election mail in the agency's first class and priority categories and preapprove overtime for postal workers. He also directed the plaintiffs to amend their claims to request more specifics, saying portions of the requested relief were "too vague to be permissible." The voters had asked the court to "enjoin the enactment of any rule, policy, or standard the purpose of which would delay the delivery of mail to or from a government entity."
Jones and a proposed class of plaintiffs are targeting USPS changes that prohibited overtime, banned late or extra trips even if deliveries weren't fully completed, instituted a hiring freeze, delayed mail sorting and called for widespread equipment removal and destruction. The operational changes would reduce sorting capacity in swing states and states likely to vote Democratic, the suit alleged.
The voters claimed the operational changes would infringe their First Amendment right to vote and to have their votes equally counted under the Fifth Amendment.
The government has countered that most of the proposed changes have been scrapped, and that any delays that have occurred so far have been mitigated by the suspension of changes.
The court was unpersuaded by the government's argument that the voters weren't injured because they can mail in their ballots early. That argument overlooked that mail delays will force some citizens to vote in person and potentially suffer exposure to the coronavirus, the opinion said.
The judge also disagreed that the government showed the challenged policies have ceased, noting that the defendants only said "nearly all" of the policies have been suspended.
"But, how many potentially uncounted votes could remain in undelivered mail in the gap between 'all' and 'nearly all' of the practices at issue?" the opinion said.
In a statement, Jones said he was grateful for the court's decision.
"The stakes of this November's election are too high to watch from the sidelines. Now more than ever, our democracy is on the line, our rights are on the line, and the fate of this nation is on the line," the statement read in part.
Representatives for the government did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The plaintiffs are represented by 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 Postal Service, Trump and DeJoy are represented by Steven Kochevar and Rebecca Tinio of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.
The case is Jones et al. v. United States Postal Service et al., case number 1:20-cv-06516, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
--Additional reporting by Pete Brush. Editing by Bruce Goldman.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
