How Mail-In Voting Took Off in 2020
In 2020, the COVID-19 changed a lot of things, including how we voted. Using the fear of catching Covid, federal and state agencies issued a strong push for mail in ballots. But here’s what many people don’t know: no single new law from Congress or a big order from President Trump at the time said, “Every state must use mail-in voting.” Instead, states leveraged laws that had been on the books for decades.
For years, the federal government had rules like the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) from 1986, which helped military members and Americans abroad vote by mail. The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) from 2002 also gave states money and ideas to make voting easier, including by mail. States built upon these laws, especially during the pandemic. Governors and election officials, like in California and Michigan, sent ballots to everyone or made it easier to vote absentee, often with state-level emergency orders.
It probably won’t surprise you that a key player here was the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Back in March of 2020, the CDC, advised states to encourage mail-in voting to “keep people safe from the virus.” They said things like, “Let’s avoid crowds at polling places and use mail or early voting instead.” This wasn’t a law, but it was a strong nudge that many states listened to, resulting in millions (about 66 million people, or 43% of voters) of cast ballots by mail. You know what they say…”never let a good crisis go to waste.”
Trump’s Mixed Messages
President Trump’s stance on mail-in voting has been a bit of a rollercoaster. Early on, he and Melania, used mail-in ballots for Florida’s primaries, and he said it was fine for convenience. But then, just a few weeks later, he flipped the script. He started warning that mail-in voting could lead to fraud, tweeting things like, “Republicans should fight mail-in voting—Democrats are trying to rig 2020!” He even pushed back against giving the U.S. Postal Service more money to handle the ballots, calling it a “disaster.” At the same time, his administration didn’t stop states from expanding it and even let the CDC’s advice stand. This mixed messaging left people confused—some saw him supporting it, others fighting it, meanwhile, states went ahead with their plans.
Fast forward to yesterday, August 18, 2025. President Trump announced on Truth Social that he plans to sign an executive order to end mail-in ballots and voting machines before the 2026 midterms. He called it a way to bring “honesty” to elections, claiming Democrats cheat with mail-in votes and that voting machines are unreliable. He suggested switching to “watermark paper” for clearer results. As of the posting of this article there’s no official text of the executive order yet, and it doesn’t appear to have been signed. Announcements on platforms like Truth Social are often a preview, but the actual signing and details could take days or weeks, depending on legal reviews and public reaction. Without the text, we can’t know the exact wording, but it’s clear he wants to limit mail-in voting nationwide.
Can an Executive Order Overturn Decades-Old Laws?
This is not as easy as the swipe of a pen. The executive order Trump announced can’t just wipe out laws like UOCAVA (1986) or HAVA (2002) that have been around for decades. Those laws were passed by Congress, and only Congress can change or repeal them. An executive order can set new rules for federal agencies or influence how the government operates (ie: not allowing the CDC to send messages encouraging mail in voting), but it can’t override state election laws or long-standing federal statutes. States have the constitutional power to run their own elections, so Trump’s order will likely face huge legal challenges. Democrat governors and AG probably already have their lawsuits drafted.
For example, UOCAVA guarantees mail-in voting for military and overseas voters, overturning that would need congressional action, not just an executive pen. HAVA’s funding and guidelines are also locked in unless Congress steps in. Trump’s order might try to cut federal support for mail-in voting or pressure states, but states like Oregon, which has used mail-in voting since 1998, or Utah, which is all mail-in, could fight back hard.
What to Expect from States
States are likely to react strongly, and the response will vary:
- Red States: Some Republican-led states might welcome the order, especially if they’ve been skeptical of mail-in voting. But others, like Utah, might resist if it disrupts their established systems.
- Blue States: Democratic-led states like California and New York, which leaned heavily on mail-in voting in 2020, will probably sue, arguing it infringes on their rights. Legal battles could drag on for months or years.
- Court Challenges: Experts, like Columbia Law School’s Richard Briffault, have already said an executive order can’t rewrite election rules—that’s for Congress or states. Expect lawsuits to pile up, possibly reaching the Supreme Court.
This debate is about more than ballots; it’s about trust in our elections. Citizens in states that have pushed mail in voting for decades welcome this push to restore in person voting with ID to restore election integrity. Trump’s new move might shake things up for 2026, but it’s unlikely to erase decades of law overnight. Stay tuned as more details on the order will emerge, and your state’s leaders will have a big say in how it plays out. As much as we would love to see an Executive Order like this have a huge effect nationwide, it’s unlikely to be that easy. However, we’ll keep you updated as this story unfolds.
Support Conservative Ladies of America
Conservative Ladies of America is a grassroots 501(c)(4) nonprofit committed to defending conservative principles and empowering citizens across our country. We rely entirely on the generous support of people like you to keep our work alive.
Your donation fuels our advocacy, education, and outreach efforts—helping us stand strong for our values.
Please consider giving today. Every contribution makes a meaningful impact.
Thank you for standing with us.