All 56 Montana counties sent their absentee ballot materials to printers before courts settled the legal fight over President Donald Trump’s mail-ballot screening plan — and several opted to skip the voter-specific barcodes at the center of that plan, according to Montana Free Press (montanafreepress.org).
Printing Deadline Forces Officials to Act Without Legal Clarity
The U.S. Postal Service issued a final rule on August 27 that would compel states to generate lists of voters eligible to receive absentee ballots, with mail carriers delivering only to those on the approved list. Envelopes that don’t meet the new design requirements could be turned away under that rule. But with today marking the hard deadline for ordering printed return envelopes, county administrators across Montana couldn’t wait for the courts to weigh in.
Lewis and Clark County Elections Administrator Connor Fitzpatrick placed his printing order without the per-voter barcodes the federal rule requires. He told Montana Free Press that the envelope design the Trump administration is now mandating had previously been offered only as a voluntary option. Because a federal court has placed the rule under injunction, Fitzpatrick and administrators in other counties moved ahead under the existing specifications. Return envelopes for at least Cascade, Gallatin, Lewis and Clark, and Missoula counties will not conform to the enjoined postal rule.
Montana’s ballot and envelope specifications are set by the secretary of state’s office, which has issued no updated guidance since the Postal Service posted its screening rule in August.
Court Injunction Leaves Practical Questions Unanswered
A federal judge in Massachusetts concluded that the Postal Service’s mail-ballot restrictions are likely unconstitutional and blocked the agency from moving forward. The Trump administration has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to lift that injunction. Roughly two dozen states have filed suit against the federal government to stop the plan; Montana’s state government has taken the opposite position, intervening in court to support it.
Fitzpatrick and Cascade County Elections Administrator Terry Thompson sat down with the regional postmaster in Great Falls before the printing deadline, hoping for guidance. The postmaster had none to offer — the injunction left the rule’s status too uncertain to provide direction. Other administrators reported a separate practical problem: the software platform for uploading voter-approved lists to the Postal Service has never been made available to them, they have received no training on it, and they currently have no access to it at all.
Officials Warn of Voter Confusion and Supply Limits
Missoula County Deputy Elections Administrator Nathan Coyan said the swirling uncertainty is already reaching voters. He expects residents to show up requesting replacement absentee ballots because of the confusion — a situation made harder by the fact that backup ballot supplies are finite. Coyan also pointed out that voter rolls shift continuously as new registrations arrive ahead of Election Day, and no one has explained how a list submitted by the printing deadline could be updated to reflect those changes.
Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder Eric Semerad said his county’s 2026 envelopes were produced according to specifications the Montana secretary of state last updated in 2025. His office’s main priority was making sure the return barcode would route ballots correctly back to the county — a concern sharpened by a barcode error in the June primary that caused some envelopes to be addressed to Poplar. Postal workers caught the problem, and election staff corrected it with masking tape.
Semerad said ballots are currently being printed for an October 9 mailing. He warned that if the Supreme Court overturns the Massachusetts injunction at this point, counties across the country would face sudden disqualification of their already-printed envelopes and would need to submit or resubmit approved-voter lists to the Postal Service on short notice. “It is past the reasonable point” for such a reversal, he said, given that early voting preparations are already underway nationwide. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the administration’s request.