DC Circuit rules USPS challenges must filter through Postal Regulatory Commission

WASHINGTON (CN) — A D.C. Circuit panel ruled Tuesday that plaintiffs must first challenge any postal changes by the U.S. Postal Service at the Postal Regulatory Commission before they can be heard in federal court, likely stymying any such lawsuits before the November midterms.

The three-judge panel unanimously reversed a federal judge’s summary judgment finding for New York, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York City and San Francisco after determining he held no jurisdiction over the claim, which was brought in 2020 over concerns a set of policy changes would impact the November 2020 election.

In the summer of 2020, the Postal Service’s changes included a reduction of the number of high-speed mail sorting machines, a decrease of employee overtime, the elimination of late or extra mail delivery trips and a change in how mail carriers sort and deliver the mail.

The state and city coalition sued in August 2020, successfully arguing the Postal Service failed to obtain an advisory opinion from the commission before making the changes, leading Senior U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Bill Clinton appointee, to enjoin the changes in September 2020.

In September 2022, Sullivan granted summary judgment to the coalition after finding the postal commission’s review scheme was supplemental and federal court review was necessary to ensure prompt relief. His ruling permanently enjoined the Postal Service from implementing the elimination of late or extra trips without obtaining an advisory opinion from the commission.

U.S. Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, a Donald Trump appointee, wrote the court’s opinion and said Congress laid out a specific review scheme in the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 that only gave federal courts jurisdiction to hear appeals of the postal commission’s orders, not initial lawsuits.

“We begin and end with jurisdiction,” Rao wrote. “The states were required to bring the advisory opinion claim in an administrative complaint filed with the commission, not in a lawsuit filed with the district court. Because the District Court lacked jurisdiction, we reverse.”

The Postal Regulatory Commission is made up of five commissioners, led by Vice Chairman Robert Taub, with Commissioners Thomas Day, Ann Fisher and Ashley Poling, while the chair position remains vacant. The commission may only include three commissioners from the same party — Taub and Fisher are both Republicans, while Day is an independent and Poling a Democrat.

Postmaster General David Steiner suggested to House lawmakers in March that Congress could eliminate the commission entirely to prevent the Postal Service from running out of cash in early 2027.

Rao, joined by Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan and U.S. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins — both Barack Obama appointees — applied a common test set by the landmark Supreme Court case *Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. Reich,*commonly referred to as the Thunder Basinfactors.

“When Congress channels claims for initial review by an administrative agency, rather than a district court, we must respect that jurisdictional choice,” Rao wrote. “Congress may channel claims by explicitly precluding judicial review. Congress may also channel claims ‘implicitly, by specifying [an administrative] method to resolve claims about agency action.’”

The decision comes as the Trump administration is moving to again overhaul the U.S. Postal Service’s regulations in advance of the critical midterm elections in November, where the Republican Party is likely to lose its slim majority to the Democrats.

On March 31, Trump signed an executive order titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” which would create lists of U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and instruct the U.S. Postal Service to send mail ballots only to verified voters.

A resulting lawsuit filed by top Democrats in Congress and the Democratic National Committee faltered in court on May 28, after U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols found no imminent or irreparable harm stemmed from the executive order’s changes as the Postal Service had yet to enact them.

That case is now before the D.C. Circuit.

In Tuesday’s decision, Rao rejected the coalition’s irreparable harm argument — which noted the regulatory commission can take up to 90 days to act on a complaint — as it would create an exception that allows parties to circumvent the review scheme created by Congress.

The panel ultimately remanded the case to Sullivan with instructions to dismiss the coalition’s advisory opinion claim, leaving the door open for a later lawsuit following review by the regulatory commission.

Neither the state and city coalition nor the Justice Department responded to a request for comment.

Follow @Ryan_Knappy