Category: Public official — Senate-confirmed independent federal governor (Board of Governors, U.S. Postal Service) Role: Governor of the U.S. Postal Service since June 2021 (Senate-confirmed May 13, 2021; term expires December 8, 2026); Board Chair since November 14, 2024, re-elected November 14, 2025; earlier, Board Vice Chair from November 14, 2023. Nominated by President Joe Biden. Politically independent. Priority: P3 — Network mapping / oversight watch. The documented record shows a Senate-confirmed governor performing ordinary governance functions (selecting a Postmaster General, approving price changes, chairing committees, signing an agency letter about compliance with court orders). No wrongdoing, court finding, or ethics finding attributed to her personally was located. She is profiled because the Board she chairs oversees the Postal Service rule on 2026 ballot mail, and because she is named as a defendant in her official capacity in the litigation over that rule. Priority should be revisited if court records or Board minutes show the Board itself, or its Chair, directed or approved the rule’s implementation. That question is now formally on the record: on September 4, 2026 Senate Homeland Security Democrats asked the Board, by name, which officials “including the Board of Governors” approved the final rule. No answer was located.

Basis for Inclusion Subject classification: Public official — a Senate-confirmed member and current Chair of the Board of Governors of an independent federal establishment. She is not a private citizen; the private-citizen anchor test is applied only as a conservative check. Non-Speech Anchor Test result: The anchor is official conduct in an appointed-office capacity: (1) presiding over the May 2025 Board decision to appoint David Steiner as Postmaster General and announcing it; (2) Board approval of the 2026 mailing-services price change (a Board action, not one attributed to her individually); (3) co-signing, with the Postmaster General, a July 13, 2026 agency letter to Senate Democrats about the Postal Service’s compliance with court orders on the 2026 ballot-mail rule; (4) being named in her official capacity as a defendant in the litigation over Executive Order 14399 and the rule. No criminal charge, financing, or organizational-leadership anchor applies. Strip Test: Removing all speeches, interviews, social-media posts and her earlier advocacy work leaves the Senate confirmation record, Board announcements and price approvals, the co-signed agency letter, and the court captions naming her. Those are official acts or official-capacity records. Result: passes. What is NOT the basis for inclusion: Her earlier career in election administration and at the National Vote at Home Institute, her views on voting by mail, her memberships in nonpartisan election-policy groups, and her public speeches are not the basis for inclusion. Accountability attaches to official acts only. Critics’ characterizations of her background are not adopted here. Taxonomy note: The category and subcategory above (trump-administration / economic-and-regulatory) are a placement of convenience, the closest existing leaf for federal-agency governance. They do not imply that she was appointed by, or is aligned with, the Trump administration; she was appointed by President Biden.

Role

The Postal Service is an independent establishment of the federal government. Its Board of Governors, whose members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to seven-year terms, oversees the agency and selects the Postmaster General; the Postmaster General can be removed only by the Board (AP). McReynolds was confirmed on May 13, 2021 by a 59-38 vote to the remainder of a term that expires December 8, 2026 (USPS bio; Durbin press release). Under federal law a governor may serve a “holdover” year after a term expires pending a successor’s confirmation (Congressional Research Service). As of the sources reviewed, four Trump nominees, all Republicans, await Senate confirmation to the Board (AP).

USPS reports that she chaired the Board’s Election Mail Committee and served on its Operations Committee throughout 2025; her current assignments are chair of the Strategic Government Services Committee and membership on the Compensation and Governance Committee (USPS). Her Board colleagues are Vice Chairman Derek Kan and Governors Ronald Stroman and Daniel Tangherlini; the Postmaster General is David Steiner and the Deputy Postmaster General is Doug Tulino (USPS; Supreme Court stay application).

Background

• Raised in Kewanee, Illinois; B.S., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; M.Sc., London School of Economics and Political Science (USPS bio; Wikipedia).
• Worked in the Denver Clerk and Recorder’s office from 2005 to 2018, serving as Denver’s director of elections from 2011 to 2018, where she led a transition to a vote-by-mail model and the Ballot TRACE ballot-tracking program (Wikipedia; USPS bio). Governing magazine named her a Public Official of the Year in 2018.
• Became founding CEO of the National Vote at Home Institute in August 2018, a nonpartisan organization that advocates expanding voting by mail (Wikipedia; USPS bio). She co-authored When Women Vote (2020), served on the 2021 Colorado Independent Redistricting Commission, and serves on the National Task Force on Election Crises and the National Council on Election Integrity (USPS bio).
• President Biden announced his intent to appoint her on February 24, 2021; the nomination reached the Senate on March 15, 2021 (Wikipedia). She was sworn in June 15, 2021 (Wikipedia).
• USPS describes her as the first governor with a background in election administration; Wikipedia records that she is not affiliated with either major party. The Wikipedia infobox dates her chairmanship to December 6, 2024; USPS dates her election as chair to November 14, 2024, which is used here.

Democratic Malice Assessment

Designation: None

Ideology vs. Malice determination: Ideology. The documented acts are governance decisions by a multi-member board: the appointment of a Postmaster General, approval of a price change, and a co-signed letter stating that the Postal Service was abiding by court injunctions. None involves a directive to obstruct certification, submit false certificates, defy a court, or dismantle an accountability mechanism, so none of the five distinguishing factors is met on the evidence reviewed. The 2026 ballot-mail rule is the closest question. It was issued by the Postal Service under a presidential executive order, and a federal court, at the preliminary-injunction stage, found it unconstitutional where it intrudes on Elections Clause powers. But the sources reviewed attribute the rulemaking to the Postmaster General and the agency, not to a Board vote or a directive by the Chair; the extent of the Board’s role is not established. The fullest account of the Board’s conduct, ProPublica’s September 2026 reporting, describes weeks of internal deliberation after which some governors, fearing removal, “remained silent, counting on the courts to block the measure.” That describes a failure to intervene, attributed by anonymous sources to unnamed governors. It is not a directive, and it is not scored against her. Her public record before joining the Board is advocacy for a voting method within lawful process, which is ideology, not malice. An allegation, reported by a whistleblower through Sen. Blumenthal, that agency staff continued work on the ballot-mail portal while an injunction was in effect is directed at Postal Service leadership generally; it names no act by her and is not scored.

Framework note: The Democratic Malice Assessment evaluates subversion of democratic mechanisms themselves, not policy disagreement. Holding conservative, populist, or nationalist policy positions — even extreme ones — within constitutional process is ideology, not malice.

Framework disclosure: This Democratic Malice Assessment applies a published analytical framework to documented public actions by public officials. All factual predicates are cited to primary or secondary sources. This assessment is subject to update as new evidence emerges or prior evidence is corrected.

Legal Disclaimer

The Democratic Malice Assessment is an analytical framework applying defined criteria to documented public conduct. Designations are evaluative conclusions, not statements of criminal guilt. No DMS score constitutes a finding of criminal liability. The factual predicates are cited to primary sources; the evaluative conclusions are protected expression. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and its progeny apply to this assessment of a public figure’s public conduct.

Dangerous Rhetoric Assessment

Finding: None

Determination: The public statements located are institutional: a press-release statement welcoming Steiner as Postmaster General, a co-signed agency letter, and a brief procedural reply at a Board meeting. They contain no dehumanizing, group-targeting or incitement-risk language, so no construct is coded and no span passed the gate. Her earlier writing and speeches on election administration were not retrieved in full and are not assessed.

Framework note: The DRA evaluates the transition from protected adversarial rhetoric to group-directed dangerous speech, not hard-edged or offensive politics. Vigorous, even harsh, political speech — including sharp attacks on political opponents and institutions — is protected and is not scored.

Legal Disclaimer

The Dangerous Rhetoric Assessment applies a published analytical framework to documented, public statements by a public figure. The Dehumanization, Targeting, and Incitement-Risk scores are evaluative judgments about the quoted text — not statements of criminal guilt, not findings that the speech is legally unprotected, and not claims that any statement caused or will cause a specific act of violence. Nothing here asserts incitement in the legal sense: Brandenburg v. Ohio places that bar at speech directed to and likely to produce imminent lawless action, and these scores sit well below it. Each score cites its verbatim source quote; the factual predicates are the quotations, and the evaluative conclusions are protected expression (Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.). New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and its progeny apply to this assessment of a public figure’s public statements. This assessment is subject to update as new evidence emerges or prior evidence is corrected.

Documented Actions

1. Confirmed to the Board of Governors (May 13, 2021)

President Biden nominated McReynolds to the seat vacated by David C. Williams; the Senate confirmed her 59-38 on May 13, 2021 to a term expiring December 8, 2026. Sen. Durbin’s statement described her as the former CEO of the National Vote at Home Institute.

Source[1] USPS bio; [2] Durbin press release; [3] Senate Democrats wrap-up, May 13, 2021. Pattern: Ordinary appointment through the constitutional process. Baseline fact.Evidence: Senate wrap-up record and Sen. Durbin’s May 13, 2021 press release; USPS bio.

2. Elected Vice Chair (November 14, 2023), Chair (November 14, 2024) and re-elected Chair (November 14, 2025)

Her fellow governors elected her. The November 2025 re-election, and that of Vice Chair Derek Kan, was unanimous. Kan is a Republican and was also appointed by President Biden.

Source[1] USPS bio; [4] USPS newsroom, November 14, 2025; [5] Save the Post Office nominee table. Pattern: Internal Board governance. Baseline fact.Evidence: USPS press release, November 14, 2025; USPS bio.

3. Announced the Board’s selection of David Steiner as Postmaster General (May 9, 2025)

After Louis DeJoy resigned in March 2025, the Board announced it had chosen Steiner, a former Waste Management CEO and FedEx board member, as the 76th Postmaster General, subject to background and ethics vetting. In the Board’s release, McReynolds said Steiner was “the right person to lead the Postal Service at this time” and that the Board expected him to provide “universal and excellent service” in a financially sustainable way. Steiner took office in July 2025. Doug Tulino served as acting Postmaster General in the interim.

Source[6] USPS newsroom, May 9, 2025; [7] Iowa Public Radio (NPR), May 9, 2025; [8] NAPS. Pattern: The Board’s principal statutory power exercised through a collective vote. The sources reviewed do not describe individual governors’ votes, the candidate field, or any White House contact; those are unestablished.Evidence: USPS Board press release, May 9, 2025; NPR/Iowa Public Radio; NAPS summary.

4. Board approval of the July 2026 mailing-services price change (April 2026)

On April 9, 2026 USPS filed notice with the Postal Regulatory Commission of mailing-services price changes effective July 12, 2026, “approved by the governors,” averaging about 4.8 percent and raising the Forever stamp from 78 to 82 cents.

Source[9] USPS newsroom, April 9, 2026. Pattern: Routine Board action under the Delivering for America financial plan; no individual vote or statement by McReynolds is documented in the sources reviewed.Evidence: USPS press release, April 9, 2026.

5. Co-signed letter to Senate Democrats on the executive order and proposed rule (July 13, 2026)

Postmaster General Steiner and McReynolds wrote to Senate Democrats, who had asked USPS to refuse to implement Executive Order 14399 and to withdraw the proposed rule published June 2, 2026. The letter said the Postal Service “is abiding by these injunctions, which are also currently under appeal,” and that “any issuance of a final rule would be impacted by the outcome of ongoing litigation.” It also described the proposed changes as consistent with the Postal Service’s “existing — and longstanding — recommended best practices,” per Democracy Docket. Senate Homeland Security Democrats later cited it as a letter from Steiner and McReynolds to Ranking Member Gary Peters dated July 13, 2026, a Monday, which matches Democracy Docket’s first report that it was written “Monday.” A later Democracy Docket article dates it July 15; the Senate citation is used here. The full letter text was not available for this profile.

The letter answered two Senate letters addressed to McReynolds by name: an April 20, 2026 letter from 37 senators, which opened “Dear Chairwoman McReynolds” and demanded the Board “follow the law and not implement this executive order,” and a June 23, 2026 follow-up complaining that the first letter had gone unanswered.

Source[10] Democracy Docket, “USPS says it’s not implementing Trump’s anti-mail voting order, for now”; [11] Padilla press release; [22] HSGAC letter, Sept. 4, 2026; [23] Senate letter, June 23, 2026; [24] Senate letter, April 20, 2026; [26] Democracy Docket, whistleblower report. Pattern: A Chair co-signing an agency response affirming compliance with court orders. On its face this is the opposite of defiance. Its weight now depends on facts that are in dispute: the whistleblower alleges that portal work resumed “on or around” July 29, about two weeks after the letter, while the June injunction was still in effect, and the senators later wrote that finalizing the rule on August 21 “undermine[d] your previous commitments.” Nothing located shows that McReynolds knew of, or approved, any resumption of work.Evidence: Democracy Docket reports quoting the letter; Senate HSGAC Democrats’ September 4, 2026 letter (footnote 3) for the date and addressee; the April 20 and June 23 letters.

6. Named as an official-capacity defendant in the ballot-mail litigation (April–September 2026)

McReynolds is a named defendant “in her official capacity as Chair of the Postal Service Board of Governors” in at least three District of Massachusetts cases before Judge Indira Talwani, alongside Steiner, Tulino, Kan, Stroman and Tangherlini:

• League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-11549 (filed April 2, 2026), in which Judge Talwani issued the August 11, 2026 nationwide injunction and the August 27 temporary restraining order against the final rule (CourtListener).
• State of California v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-11581 (filed April 3, 2026), the 23-state challenge to the executive order, in which the June 25, 2026 injunction issued (CourtListener).
• State of California v. United States Postal Service, No. 1:26-cv-13917 (filed August 26, 2026, the day the final rule was published), the states’ challenge to the rule itself; the plaintiff states’ TRO motion lists her in its defendants footnote (CourtListener).

Judge Talwani’s September 4, 2026 preliminary injunction found the final rule unconstitutional where it intrudes on the Elections Clause powers of Congress and the States. The First Circuit’s September 10, 2026 order (No. 26-2029) lists her and Vice Chairman Kan as parties and denied a stay. She is also listed among the applicants in the government’s September 3, 2026 Supreme Court stay application on the final rule (No. 26A297).

The appellate record split. On August 24, 2026 the Supreme Court paused Judge Talwani’s June ruling on the states’ timing to sue, without reaching the order’s legality (NPR). On September 14, 2026, in United States Postal Service v. California, No. 26A305, the Court denied a stay of the injunction against the final rule, finding the government “unlikely to succeed on the merits”; Justice Kavanaugh concurred on the ground that applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious, and Justices Alito and Thomas dissented. The order left the injunction in place heading into the November 3, 2026 election.

Being named as an official-capacity defendant is a feature of suing an agency; it is not a finding about her conduct. No filing located attributes a decision to her.

Source[12] Talwani order, Aug. 11, 2026; [13] First Circuit order, Sept. 10, 2026; [14] Supreme Court application No. 26A139; [29] Supreme Court order No. 26A305; [30] NPR, Aug. 24, 2026; [32] Plaintiff States’ TRO motion, No. 1:26-cv-13917; [33] CourtListener dockets; [34] Supreme Court application No. 26A297; see USPS and Mail Ballot Interference: What Changed and What You Can Do for the litigation chronology. Pattern: Institutional defendant, not a personal finding.Evidence: Court orders (D. Mass. Aug. 11 and Sept. 4, 2026; First Circuit Sept. 10, 2026; U.S. Supreme Court Sept. 14, 2026); D. Mass. dockets retrieved from CourtListener on October 5, 2026; plaintiff states’ TRO motion; Supreme Court stay applications listing the enjoined officials.

7. The Board’s role in the ballot-mail rule (partly reported, not established)

Public reporting attributes the rulemaking to Postmaster General Steiner, who told Government Executive that USPS “is not a political organization” and stands in the middle of policy decisions largely outside its control, and who moved to finalize the rule “arguing he had little choice,” per AP. ProPublica reported that Steiner “directed Postal Service leaders to prepare to implement the order,” and that postal officials began writing compliance procedures “at his direction.” Steiner’s September 4, 2026 statement defended the rule in the first person plural as an Executive Branch establishment carrying out “policies set forth by policymakers”; it does not mention the Board. The final rule was signed by Colleen Hibbert-Kapler, Attorney, Ethics and Legal Compliance, and its text does not say whether the governors approved it. It records that some public comments criticized “the Board’s leadership.”

ProPublica’s September 2026 account of the order’s origins is the only reporting located on the Board’s own deliberations:

• “Deliberations on whether to comply with the order stretched on for weeks.” Some board members “found it alarming but feared Trump would respond to a direct challenge by trying to fire them,” and “remained silent, counting on the courts to block the measure.”
• One source said: “The board was being careful how or when it took action, knowing that it might be its last action.” ProPublica reported that the Supreme Court’s June 2026 decision allowing removal of independent-agency leaders “gave the governors pause.”
• A Postal Service spokesperson declined to discuss the deliberations and said “it was the Board of Governors’ policy not to discuss them.”

The reporting rests on anonymous sources and names no individual governor. It does not say whether the Board voted, how McReynolds voted or argued, or whether she was among the members who found the order alarming.

In its September 1, 2026 statement on the Federal Ballot Mail Portal, USPS said work had at all times been conducted consistent with court orders. A whistleblower disclosure delivered to Sen. Blumenthal alleged that work on the portal resumed while an injunction was in effect; Judge Talwani criticized the Postal Service for resuming work, and USPS disputed the characterization. The disclosure, as reported, describes decisions by Postal Service management and does not name the Board or its Chair.

At a closed Board meeting in Potomac, Maryland, held (by the protesters’ account) after ballots had begun going out, protesters asked the governors to commit to delivering every ballot. McReynolds replied, “Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We are in a private meeting,” and later, “this is a different subject for meeting,” according to a press release by the Sunrise Movement, the advocacy group that staged the protest. The meeting date was not established.

Critics now direct the question at her by name. After the September 14 Supreme Court order, American Postal Workers Union President Jonathan Smith said “postal management and the Board of Governors never should have allowed things to go this far” and that “it is past time for Chairwoman McReynolds and the governors to stand up for the Postal Service’s independence and ensure that this rule never sees the light of day.” To ProPublica, Smith called agency leadership’s reliance on the courts “a dangerous calculation.” These are a union’s characterizations, recorded as advocacy, not adopted.

Source[15] AP via Durango Herald; [16] Government Executive, Aug. 31, 2026; [17] USPS statement, Sept. 1, 2026; [18] Votebeat, Sept. 1, 2026; [19] Common Dreams newswire (Sunrise Movement); [27] ProPublica; [28] APWU, Sept. 15, 2026; [31] Federal Register final rule; [35] Steiner statement, Sept. 4, 2026. Pattern: An oversight gap rather than an act. The best available reporting describes a Board that chose not to confront the White House and left the question to the courts. If accurate, that is a judgment about the limits of the Board’s supervisory duty; it is not a directive to implement the rule, and no part of it is attributed to McReynolds individually.Evidence: AP; Government Executive; ProPublica; Steiner statement, Sept. 4, 2026; the final rule; USPS statement, Sept. 1, 2026; Votebeat and CBS coverage of the whistleblower disclosure; Sunrise Movement release and APWU statement (advocacy sources, used only for what they quote or demand).

8. Addressee of congressional demands to halt the rule (April–September 2026)

Democratic members of Congress addressed their demands to the Board, with McReynolds named first, as well as to the Postmaster General:

• April 20, 2026: 37 senators, led by Gary Peters, Alex Padilla, Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer, wrote to “Chairwoman McReynolds, Vice Chairman Kan, Governor Stroman, Governor Tangherlini, and Postmaster General Steiner,” noting that Congress “bestowed the postal power on the Board of Governors of the Postal Service — not the President.”
• June 23, 2026: a second Senate letter to Steiner and the governors after the proposed rule, stating that “we received no response to that letter.”
• July 2, 2026: a House Democratic comment letter urging USPS to rescind the proposed rule, copied to each governor including McReynolds as Chair.
• September 4, 2026: Senate Homeland Security Democrats, led by Peters, wrote to “Chairwoman McReynolds” and the other governors calling on them to “halt your breakneck implementation” and rescind the final rule. They asked, with a September 11 deadline, “which executive branch leadership officials, including the Board of Governors, at the Postal Service or OMB approved the final rule and directed that it be published in the Federal Register on August 26, 2026, despite active court orders.”

The only written response located is the July 13 Steiner-McReynolds letter (item 5).

Source[22] HSGAC letter, Sept. 4, 2026; [23] Senate letter, June 23, 2026; [24] Senate letter, April 20, 2026; [25] House letter, July 2, 2026. Pattern: Formal oversight placing the Board’s approval role in question. The answer to the September 4 question about who approved the rule would settle the central open issue in this profile.Evidence: The letters themselves.

Pattern Analysis

Cross-References

• The Postmaster General she and the Board selected: see David Steiner — Postmaster General and CEO, U.S. Postal Service.
• Fellow governors and executives: Derek T. Kan — Vice Chairman, U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors, Ronald A. Stroman — Member (Governor), U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors, Daniel M. Tangherlini — Member (Governor), U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors, Doug Tulino — Deputy Postmaster General, COO and Chief Human Resources Officer, U.S. Postal Service.
• Ballot-mail rule background and litigation chronology: USPS and Mail Ballot Interference: What Changed and What You Can Do.

Severity Assessment

• Immediate harm: Low, attributable to her personally on the evidence reviewed. The potential harm from the ballot-mail rule (rejection of ballot batches, per the whistleblower’s account) attaches to the rule and the agency, and was enjoined by the court; on September 14, 2026 the Supreme Court declined to lift that injunction.
• Democratic erosion: None attributed to her. The Postal Service issued a rule under an executive order, and a federal court at the preliminary-injunction stage found the rule unconstitutional in part; ProPublica’s reporting indicates the Board chose not to act as a check and left the matter to the courts, but it names no individual governor.
• Authoritarian marker: None.

Uncertainty: no Board minutes, Board vote records on the final rule, or her own public statements on the rule were retrieved. The only account of the Board’s deliberations is anonymously sourced (ProPublica), and USPS says it is Board policy not to discuss them. Findings could change if Board records surface or if USPS answers the September 4, 2026 Senate question about who approved the final rule.

Accountability Status

• Criminal: None documented.
• Civil / judicial: Named as an official-capacity defendant in D. Mass. Nos. 1:26-cv-11549, 1:26-cv-11581 and 1:26-cv-13917, and on appeal in the First Circuit and the Supreme Court; no finding against her personally.
• Electoral: Not applicable; appointed. Term expires December 8, 2026, with a possible holdover year.
• Legislative: Addressed by name in Senate Democratic oversight letters (April 20, June 23 and September 4, 2026) and copied on a House Democratic letter (July 2, 2026); co-signed one response (July 13, 2026). No hearing testimony by her was located; the senators’ September 4 letter cites Steiner’s testimony at the June 24, 2026 HSGAC hearing, not hers.
• Ethics or regulatory: No ethics complaint or outcome documented in the sources reviewed.

Truth and Reconciliation Considerations

Investigation priorities

1. Obtain Board of Governors meeting minutes and votes (open and closed session summaries) for 2026, especially on the executive order, the June 2 proposed rule, and the August 2026 final rule.
2. Establish whether the Board or its Election Mail Committee was briefed on the Federal Ballot Mail Portal and the resumption of work after the June 25 injunction.
3. Obtain the full text of the July 13, 2026 Steiner-McReynolds letter to Ranking Member Peters.
4. Obtain any USPS or Board response to the September 4, 2026 HSGAC letter, especially its question about whether the Board approved the final rule.
5. Establish whether the Board voted, or declined to vote, on the executive order or the rule, and McReynolds’s position in the deliberations ProPublica describes.
6. Establish the Board’s role in the December 24, 2025 postmark policy and the Regional Transportation Optimization changes; the sources reviewed do not say.

Institutional reform

• Board transparency: Publish Board votes and summaries of closed sessions on rules with election consequences.
• Election-mail safeguards: Require notice to Congress and the Postal Regulatory Commission before any change to election-mail acceptance standards within a set period before a general election.

Cross-References

Skills: patriot-voting-research, democratic-health-monitoring, public-records-research-specialist

Related profiles: david-steiner-profile, derek-kan-profile, ronald-stroman-profile, daniel-tangherlini-profile, doug-tulino-profile

Topics: USPS Board of Governors, Executive Order 14399, Ballot Mail for Federal Elections final rule, Postal Service governance, Delivering for America, election mail

Factual correction requests: If you believe information in this profile is incorrect, please contact factcheck@citizenanalyst.ai with your name (optional), the specific claim, and any supporting documentation. We review all submissions and correct verified errors promptly.

Sources

1. USPS, “Amber F. McReynolds,” Board of Governors bio (latest update December 2025). https://about.usps.com/who/leadership/board-governors/amber-mcreynolds.htm
2. Sen. Dick Durbin, “Durbin Statement On Confirmation Of Postal Board Of Governors Nominees,” May 13, 2021. https://www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/durbin-statement-on-confirmation-of-postal-board-of-governors-nominees
3. Senate Democrats, “Wrap Up for Thursday, May 13, 2021.” https://www.democrats.senate.gov/2021/05/13/wrap-up-for-thursday-may-13-2021
4. USPS, “Amber F. McReynolds Re-Elected Chair of the Postal Service Board of Governors,” November 14, 2025. https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2025/1114-amber-f-mcreynolds-re-elected-chair-of-the-postal-service-board-of-governors.htm
5. Save the Post Office, “Confirmation hearings on nominees to USPS Board of Governors begin this week.” https://www.savethepostoffice.com/confirmation-hearings-on-nominees-to-usps-board-of-governors-begin-this-week
6. USPS, “Postal Service Board of Governors appoints David Steiner to be 76th Postmaster General and CEO,” May 9, 2025. https://about.usps.com/newsroom/local-releases/nd/2025/0509-postal-service-bog-appoints-david-steiner-to-be-76th-post-master-general-and-ceo-of-the-usps.htm
7. Iowa Public Radio (NPR), “David Steiner of FedEx is tapped to be the U.S. Postal Service’s new leader,” May 9, 2025. https://www.iowapublicradio.org/news-from-npr/2025-05-09/david-steiner-of-fedex-is-tapped-to-be-the-u-s-postal-services-new-leader
8. NAPS, “Postal Board of Governors Select David Steiner as Next Postmaster General.” https://naps.org/post/Postal-Board-of-Governors-Select-David-Steiner-as-Next-Postmaster-General
9. USPS, “U.S. Postal Service Recommends New Prices for July,” April 9, 2026. https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2026/0409-usps-recommends-new-prices-for-july.htm
10. Democracy Docket, “USPS says it’s not implementing Trump’s anti-mail voting order, for now.” https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/usps-says-its-not-implementing-trumps-anti-mail-voting-order-for-now
11. Sen. Alex Padilla, “Padilla, Peters, Schumer Lead Senate Democrats in Demanding USPS Abandon Plan to Carry Out Trump’s Illegal Executive Order Restricting Vote by Mail.” https://www.padilla.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/padilla-peters-schumer-lead-senate-democrats-in-demanding-usps-abandon-plan-to-carry-out-trumps-illegal-executive-order-restricting-vote-by-mail
12. Memorandum and Order, League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump (D. Mass. Aug. 11, 2026). https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/2026-08-11-Order.pdf
13. Order of Court, No. 26-2029 (1st Cir. Sept. 10, 2026). https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/ca1-stay-denial.pdf
14. Application for stay, California v. Trump, No. 26A139 (U.S. Supreme Court, July 2026). https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/26/26A139/417505/20260729033246165_California%20v%20Trump%20-%20final%20State%20Defendants%20Stay%20Application.pdf
15. Associated Press, “Trump’s mail voting crackdown tests Postal Service leader who says he’s ‘not political'” (via Durango Herald). https://www.durangoherald.com/articles/associated-press/trumps-mail-voting-crackdown-tests-postal-service-leader-who-says-hes-not-political-2
16. Government Executive, “‘Not our decision,’ USPS chief says…,” August 31, 2026. https://www.govexec.com/management/2026/08/not-our-decision-usps-chief-says-agency-faces-mail-voting-lawsuits-and-looming-cash-crisis-once-more/415726
17. USPS, “USPS Statement on Development of U.S. Federal Ballot Mail Portal,” September 1, 2026. https://about.usps.com/newsroom/statements/090126-statement-on-development-of-us-federal-ballot-mail-portal.htm
18. Votebeat, “USPS whistleblower says rushed new mail ballot systems could disenfranchise voters,” September 1, 2026. https://www.votebeat.org/national/2026/09/01/usps-election-mail-ballots-plan-whistleblower-richard-blumenthal
19. Common Dreams newswire (Sunrise Movement), “Young Voters Confront USPS Board of Governors About Mail-In Ballots” (advocacy-group release). https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/young-voters-confront-usps-board-of-governors-about-mail-in-ballots
20. Wikipedia, “Amber McReynolds.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amber_McReynolds
21. Congressional Research Service, “US Postal Service Board of Governors” (IF12864). https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/IF/HTML/IF12864.html
22. Sens. Gary Peters et al. (HSGAC Democrats), letter to Chairwoman McReynolds, the governors and Postmaster General Steiner, September 4, 2026 (footnote 3 dates the Steiner-McReynolds letter to July 13, 2026). https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/260904_USPS_HSGAC_VBM_Letter.pdf
23. Senate Democrats, letter to Postmaster General Steiner, Chairwoman McReynolds and the governors, June 23, 2026. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/260623_USPS_Absentee_EO_Letter.pdf
24. 37 senators, letter to Chairwoman McReynolds, the governors and Postmaster General Steiner, April 20, 2026 (copy hosted by Sen. Maria Cantwell). https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/04222026_usps_letter_on_voting_eo.pdf
25. House Democrats, letter to Postmaster General Steiner on the proposed ballot-mail rule, July 2, 2026, copied to the governors (copy hosted by Rep. Ed Case). https://case.house.gov/uploadedfiles/letter_to_usps_re_ballot_mail_proposed_rule.pdf
26. Democracy Docket (Jacob Knutson), “USPS repeatedly defied courts to advance Trump’s mail voting attack, whistleblower alleges.” https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/whistleblower-usps-violated-court-orders-advance-trump-mail-voting-attack
27. ProPublica (Jen Fifield and Peter Elkind), “The Untold Origins of Trump’s Plan to Sharply Restrict Mail-In Voting,” September 2026. https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-plan-to-restrict-mail-voting
28. American Postal Workers Union, “APWU Statement on Vote-by-Mail Supreme Court Ruling,” September 15, 2026 (advocacy source). https://apwu.org/news/apwu-statement-on-vote-by-mail-supreme-court-ruling
29. Order denying application for stay, United States Postal Service v. California, No. 26A305 (U.S. Sept. 14, 2026), with Kavanaugh, J., concurring and Alito, J., dissenting. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/26a305_4g15.pdf
30. NPR (Hansi Lo Wang), “Supreme Court gives Trump an interim win on his mail voting order, but hurdles loom,” August 24, 2026. https://www.npr.org/2026/08/24/nx-s1-5909592/trump-mail-voting-order-supreme-court
31. U.S. Postal Service, “Ballot Mail for Federal Elections,” final rule, 91 Fed. Reg. 54966 (Aug. 26, 2026). https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/08/26/2026-17238/ballot-mail-for-federal-elections
32. Plaintiff States’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, State of California v. United States Postal Service, No. 1:26-cv-13917 (D. Mass. Aug. 26, 2026) (copy hosted by the New Jersey Attorney General). https://www.njoag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/2026-0826_3.-Motion-for-TRO-Emergency-Stay-Expedited-PI-and-Stay.pdf
33. CourtListener dockets, D. Mass., all assigned to Judge Indira Talwani (retrieved October 5, 2026): League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-11549, filed Apr. 2, 2026, https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73133197/league-of-women-voters-of-massachusetts-v-trump/ ; State of California v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-11581, filed Apr. 3, 2026, https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73141063/state-of-california-v-trump/ ; State of California v. United States Postal Service, No. 1:26-cv-13917, filed Aug. 26, 2026, https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/74701505/state-of-california-v-united-states-postal-service/
34. Application for stay of the injunction against the final rule, No. 26A297 (U.S., filed Sept. 3, 2026). https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/26/26A297/422948/20260903154027877_USPS%20Final%20Rule%20Stay%20and%20Appx.pdf
35. USPS, “Statement from USPS Postmaster General David Steiner regarding concerns about ballot mail for federal elections,” September 4, 2026. https://about.usps.com/newsroom/statements/090426-statement-from-usps-pmg-david-steiner-regarding-concerns-about-ballot-mail-for-federal-elections.htm

Last Updated: 2026-10-05 Profile Status: Draft — not promoted or published; Board minutes and votes on the ballot-mail rule not yet reviewed; USPS reply to the September 4, 2026 HSGAC letter not located Next Review: Weekly through the November 3, 2026 general election