On September 11, 2024, a federal grand jury indicted Gibson, 28, of Bartlett, Tennessee, in a seven-count Indictment with two counts of assault of a United States Postal employee, one count of attempted robbery of United States property, one count of assaulting and impeding a United States Postal employee, and one count of unlawful possession of a postal key. On March 10, 2026, Gibson pleaded guilty to two counts of assault with the intent to rob a United States Postal employee. In addition to the 48-month sentence, Judge Marshall also sentenced Gibson to serve two years’ supervised release. There is no parole in the federal system.

An investigation revealed that on June 11, 2022, Gibson pulled alongside a United States Postal mail carrier that sitting in the Postal vehicle while delivering mail in North Little Rock. Gibson demanded the mail carrier give him the drop box key, but the mail carrier refused and drove off. Gibson encountered the mail carrier on a different route later that day and demanded the key once again, and this time Gibson brandished a firearm at the mail carrier.

Later that same day, Gibson approached a different mail carrier who was delivering mail to an apartment complex in North Little Rock. When Gibson approached the mail carrier, he was holding a black rifle in his right hand and demanded the mail carrier immediately give him the postal key. After initially refusing, the mail carrier eventually gave the postal key to Gibson. Following the robbery, law enforcement officers from the North Little Rock Police Department conducted a traffic stop and arrested Gibson. At the time of his arrest, officers located on the floorboard of the vehicle the air rifle that resembled an AR-15 rifle that was used in the robbery. Gibson later admitted to having what appeared to be a firearm during the first attempted robbery and during the robbery of the postal key.

This case was investigated by the United States Postal Inspection Service with assistance from the North Little Rock Police Department. This case was prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Arkansas.

“Mail carriers are entrusted with the responsibility of handling citizens’ valuable and personal communications, but McAfee abused that trust by stealing more than 200 checks and gift cards,” said U.S. Attorney Theodore S. Hertzberg. “My office works closely with our federal partners to aggressively prosecute any federal employee who misuses public office for private gain.”

“Today’s sentencing sends a strong message to anyone who thinks mail theft and check fraud will go unpunished,” said Special Agent in Charge Jonathan Ulrich of the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General. “Our special agents, along with our federal and local law enforcement partners, will aggressively investigate these federal crimes to protect the sanctity of the U.S. Mail and maintain the public’s trust.”

According to U.S. Attorney Hertzberg, the charges, and other information presented in court: From August 2022 to September 2024, McAfee worked as a U.S. Postal Service mail carrier in the Smyrna, Georgia area. The U.S. Postal Service – Office of Inspector General (USPS-OIG) launched an investigation after receiving customer complaints about mail stolen along McAfee’s postal route. During the investigation, USPS-OIG obtained surveillance footage of McAfee stealing mail on her route. Additional investigation determined that she stole mail containing 171 checks, with a total value exceeding $1,035,000. USPS-OIG agents executed a search warrant at McAfee’s home, where they discovered envelopes for stolen mail, 145 stolen checks, and 37 stolen gift cards. When confronted by USPS-OIG agents in September 2024, McAfee resigned from the Postal Service.

Melissa McAfee, 44, of Jonesboro, Ga., has been sentenced to two years in prison to be followed by two years of supervised release, and was ordered to pay restitution. McAfee pleaded guilty to possession of stolen mail on May 14, 2026.

This case was investigated by the United States Postal Service – Office of Inspector General.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Samir Kaushal prosecuted the case.

The planned change for peak season, which was approved by the governors of the Postal Service, would affect prices on the following retail and commercial domestic competitive parcels: Priority Mail Express (PME), Priority Mail (PM), USPS Ground Advantage, and Parcel Select. No other products or services would be affected. Pending favorable review by the PRC, the temporary rates would go into effect at 12 a.m. CT on Oct. 4 and remain in place until 12 a.m. CT on Jan. 17, 2027.

This seasonal adjustment will bring prices for the Postal Service’s retail and commercial customers in line with competitive practices.

As a part of the Postal Service’s transformation plan, these temporary changes will support the organization in achieving our public service mission — providing a nationwide, integrated network for the delivery of mail and packages at least six days a week — in a cost-effective and financially sustainable manner over the long term, just as the U.S. Congress has intended.

The planned price changes include:

Retail:

Commercial:

The complete Postal Service price filings with prices for all products can be found on the PRC website under the Daily Listings section at prc.gov/dockets/daily. For the Shipping Services filing, see Docket No. CP2026-10. The Postal Service provides additional resources to assist customers regarding the price changes. These tools include price lists, downloadable price files and Federal Register Notices. This information will be available on the Postal Service’s Postal Explorer website at pe.usps.com/PriceChange/Index.

# # #

SCOTUS BLOG – 8/24/26

Supreme Court allows Trump administration to move forward with order imposing restrictions on mail-in voting – By Amy Howe

The Supreme Court on Monday afternoon cleared the way for the Trump administration to begin implementing an executive order, signed by President Donald Trump earlier this year, that imposes restrictions on mail-in voting. The court paused an injunction by a federal judge in Boston that had barred the federal government from applying provisions of that executive order in the November elections to 23 states (along with the District of Columbia) challenging their legality.

A separate ruling by the same judge, in a case filed by a different set of plaintiffs, temporarily prohibits the U.S. Postal Service from implementing one provision of the executive order anywhere in the United States. That ruling remains in effect, at least for now.

In its 10-page, unsigned opinion, the majority said that it was too soon for courts to consider the states’ challenge because the order has not yet been carried out – which means that the states have not suffered the kind of injury that allows their lawsuit to move forward.

The court’s three Democratic appointees dissented. In a 23-page opinion, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson accused the majority of “[t]aking its eye off the ball” and thus “miss[ing] the Government’s actual objective: to secure our imprimatur for its effort to foment chaos ahead of the November elections.”

President Donald Trump signed the executive order at the center of the dispute in March. As it came to the court in late July, the focus of the case was on three different provisions of the order. The first instructs the Department of Homeland Security to create lists of the adult U.S. citizens in each state and to send those lists to states at least 60 days before a federal election. The second provision commands the U.S. attorney general to “prioritize the investigation and, as appropriate, the prosecution of State and local officials … who issue Federal ballots to individuals not eligible to vote in a Federal election.” And the third provision requires states to give the U.S. Postal Service a list of voters to whom the states intend to send mail ballots, and it prohibits the USPS from mailing ballots to voters who are not on the lists of “enrolled” voters that the USPS will create.

A group of 23 states, led by California, and the District of Columbia challenged the government’s implementation of the order in a federal court in Massachusetts. They argued that the executive order conflicts with provisions in the Constitution that give states the power to determine voter eligibility and to set the “Times, Places, and Manner” of holding congressional elections.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled that she could not review the challengers’ claims as they applied to federal elections scheduled after Nov. 3, 2026, because those claims were not yet “ripe” – that is, ready for review. However, she said, she could review the challengers’ claims with regard to the upcoming midterm elections because the order “created a ‘direct and immediate dilemma’” for them, and she prohibited the federal government from implementing the challenged restrictions on or before Nov. 3, 2026, in the District of Columbia and the 23 states.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit declined to pause Talwani’s order while the litigation continued. It stressed that neither the federal government nor 12 states, led by Alabama, that had joined the case on the Trump administration’s side had argued that the executive order was legal. That court also rejected the contention that the challengers did not have a right to sue or that the case was not yet ripe. The consequences of the executive order, the court of appeals countered, give states “no practical choice but to respond to the EO now.”

The Trump administration came to the Supreme Court seeking relief on July 27. Calling Talwani’s order “extraordinary,” U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer renewed his argument that the challengers’ claims are not yet ripe for review because the agencies haven’t yet decided how they will implement the order. He also contended that unless Talwani’s order is paused, the government will be permanently harmed – one factor that courts consider in deciding whether to grant temporary relief – because it “blocks the government’s ability to finalize and implement the President’s proposed policies to promote election integrity for the upcoming federal elections in November.” Moreover, he added, “every day that it remains in place irreparably harms the government, as the start of mail-in and absentee voting in some States is now just one month away.”

Alabama and the other 11 states supporting the Trump administration pointed to two recent rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit involving the same executive order – one of which, they said, “held that it is too early to challenge the EO,” and the other of which allowed the executive order to be reinstated “on th[at] same basis.”

The challengers countered on Aug. 3 that putting Talwani’s injunction on hold “would allow the federal government to rush out an unprecedented, legally indefensible voter-verification and ballot-interception program that would, among other things, give the U.S. Postal Service far-reaching new powers and responsibilities.” They also emphasized that the 1st Circuit had agreed with them that “‘the specificity of the EO’s stated timelines and the inescapable legal requirements and impending deadlines that States currently face in facilitating mail-in and absentee balloting for immediately upcoming elections together establish’” the kind of “‘concrete injury’” that allows them to sue.

Three weeks later, the Trump administration once again urged the justices to step in, this time citing the imminent publication of a new U.S. Postal Service rule that, Sauer said, “imposes only modest requirements for preparation and envelope design for federal ballot mail” – such as requiring mail-in ballots “to be mailed in envelopes that include the official Election Mail logo, are automation compatible, and use unique barcodes that denote the item’s status as federal ballot mail and its delivery point ZIP code.” If the justices do not pause Talwani’s order, Sauer told them, the Postal Service “cannot implement the rule” for the upcoming November elections.

On Monday afternoon the court granted the government’s request. In its unsigned opinion, the majority wrote that the first provision of the order, instructing the DHS secretary to create state citizenship lists, is simply “an internal directive from the President to a subordinate.” Because it doesn’t require states to do anything, the majority reasoned, they are not injured by the provision – and therefore cannot challenge it. The possibility that the DHS secretary could implement the provision before November, and that the states could be harmed by that implementation, the majority stressed, is not enough to give the states a right to sue.

The second provision of the order does not harm the states, the majority continued, because it merely “directs the Attorney General to ‘prioritize’ the investigation and prosecution of those who violate existing federal laws by issuing ballots to ineligible voters.” Such an instruction, the court said, lies squarely within the powers that the Constitution gives the president.

And the third and final provision, the majority said, “orders the Postal Service to initiate the process of proposing a rule that might bind the States in the future.” When the states filed their lawsuit – which, the majority wrote, is the relevant time for determining whether the states had a right to sue – the order was “not a proposed rule, let alone a final rule.” Here too, the majority indicated, Talwani’s “conclusion that this internal directive inflicts” the kind of injury that would allow the states to sue “necessarily rests on an ‘attenuated chain of inferences.’” “If the Postal Service’s final rule harms the States,” the majority noted, “they may challenge that rule.”

The majority also found that the government would suffer irreparable harm if Talwani’s order is not paused now. Even if that ruling were eventually reversed, the majority emphasized, it “would come too late for the 2026 midterms.” By contrast, the majority said, the states would not be harmed from putting Talwani’s order on hold, because the executive order doesn’t require them to do anything.

In a four-page opinion joined by Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that she would have left Talwani’s order in place. She also stressed that the majority’s ruling “does not address whether the President’s attempts to interfere with States’ administration of the November 2026 elections are lawful. Nor does it suggest that the Executive Branch has any constitutional or statutory authority to implement the President’s directives. Instead,” she concluded, “today’s decision merely postpones adjudication of those challenges.”

Sotomayor also suggested that the government was trying to “have it both ways”: On one hand, she observed, the majority “says it was speculative to think there would be a final rule at all when this suit was filed, seemingly accepting the Government’s representation that it may not actually implement the Executive Order.” But on the other hand, she wrote, the government “insists that it seeks to implement the Executive Order immediately for purposes of establishing irreparable harm.”

Jackson acknowledged that the majority had “not foreclosed States from challenging this blatantly unconstitutional Order.” But she characterized the majority’s order as another chapter “in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating for certain plaintiffs who seek to bring election-related challenges.” Although the court has for two decades made clear “that even valid election-related legal claims can come too late,” she argued, the majority now indicates “that such claims can also come too early.” This is particularly problematic, she suggested, when “the Government (which controls the timing of proposed and final rules) can easily game the system.”

TRUMP GETS HUGE WIN AT SUPREME COURT FOR 2026 MAIL IN BALLOTS

NBC NEWS -WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court handed an initial win to the Trump administration Monday in its effort to implement an executive order aimed at limiting who can receive mail-in ballots ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

At issue are provisions that seek to create a federal list of eligible voters and order the U.S. Postal Service to deliver ballots only to those people.

The justices, divided 6-3 along ideological lines with conservatives in the majority, lifted an injunction a Massachusetts-based judge imposed in June that prevented key aspects of the executive order from going into effect this year in California and 22 other states that had challenged it.

The court also granted a similar application filed by Alabama and 11 other states.

The White House praised the court’s ruling, calling the executive order’s provisions “commonsense measures.”

“This Administration will continue to lawfully enact the agenda President Trump was elected on — which includes the safety and security of our elections,” White House spokesperson Lauren Bis said in a statement. Read more

ABC 7/NY: 8/25/26 

Democrats in 23 states and the District of Columbia sued to block the order.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for President Donald Trump to move ahead with his executive order restricting mail-in voting, though it remains unclear how much his administration can implement before the fast-approaching midterm elections.

The decision appears to leave room for additional court challenges that could further slow Trump’s order. The U.S. Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week, but time is running short to impose major changes with some states beginning to send mail ballots to voters in just a few weeks.

Mail balloting has long been a favorite target for Trump, who has claimed that it breeds fraud despite strong evidence to the contrary and his own use of the voting method.

The case could be one of multiple voting-related challenges before the justices. The Justice Department had filed an emergency appeal asking the high court to allow work on implementing the changes before the midterms.

Trump’s executive order, signed in March, calls on his administration to create lists of eligible voters and orders the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on those lists. Read more

Justice Department urges judge to allow USPS to track mail ballots

USA Today 8/25/26 – The Justice Department urged a judge to allow the U.S. Postal Service to impose new restrictions on mail-in voting, after the Supreme Court lifted one of her two blocks against the policy.

But even if the blocks in both cases are lifted, opponents of the policy are expected to continue fighting in court, to prevent the restrictions from being placed on the Nov. 3 election.

The court battle came after President Donald Trump signed an executive order in March directing agencies to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and to use federal data to help state election officials verify which voters are eligible.

The Postal Service proposed that states provide the individual barcodes associated with every mail-in ballot, to check them as they are districted to help prevent fraud. A group of 23 states challenged the policy in one lawsuit and the League of Women Voters filed a similar lawsuit that argued the Postal Service has no role in the administration of elections. Read more

Of course, the NALC does not agree with this decision – what do you expect from the NALC:

This case began as a workers’ compensation investigation. A letter carrier who injured her knee while running from a dog on her route was receiving workers’ compensation payments, but she failed to notify the Postal Service when her knee healed.

She also didn’t report the income she was receiving from her side business of selling meals and clothing out of her home.

Special agents with the Postal Service’s Office of Inspector General, or OIG, discovered that the carrier applied for and received a $20,000 Paycheck Protection Program, or PPP, loan from the Small Business Administration. Such loans were intended to cover payroll expenses when business owners weren’t making sufficient money during the pandemic.

The letter carrier told agents that a co-worker had helped her fill out the loan application. This triggered a joint investigation with the Labor Department and Small Business Administration OIGs.

Postal Service OIG special agents learned that this same co-worker helped a second employee get a $43,000 PPP loan; a third employee get a $28,000 PPP loan and cheat on her income tax returns; and a fourth employee get $1.3 million in PPP loans.

She charged each co-worker substantial fees for her services and helped another four people outside the Postal Service receive a combined $165,000 in fraudulent PPP loans.

Special agents said this employee knew exactly what to write on the loan applications and tax forms to make everything look legitimate. She created fake businesses and email accounts for her co-workers so they could apply for the loans, and she prepared all the necessary paperwork — including tax declarations. Banks then processed the loan applications and the Small Business Administration disbursed the funds directly to the alleged business owners.

The Postal Service fired all of the employees who were involved. Four of them were charged, tried and sentenced — along with four non-USPS co-conspirators — to a combined 15 years in federal prison. The employee who masterminded the scam received the longest sentence — five years.

They were also ordered to pay $2 million in restitution.

“When Postal Service employees conspire to defraud federal programs, they’re stealing from the American public,” said USPS Inspector General Tammy Hull. “Our special agents will always hold those who betray that trust accountable.”

The OIG recently highlighted the case on its website.

If you know of a USPS employee committing workers’ compensation fraud, report it to the OIG. Report suspected pandemic relief fraud to the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee’s Hotline.

Writer celebrated where life imitated art

SOUTH BERWICK, ME — 8/21/26 – The U.S. Postal Service honored Sarah Orne Jewett with a stamp today at the Sarah Orne Jewett Literary House in the town she would call home her entire life. The stamp features an original portrait of the author with the Maine coast as background and a ray of sunshine, evoking a scene from her best-known work, “The Country of the Pointed Firs.”

“Sarah Orne Jewett is the premier historical icon of South Berwick, and her writings captured 19th-century New England life. I have personally read her moving work and it is an honor to have her stamp unveiled in our community today,” said South Berwick Postmaster Matthew Kirksey. “This stamp proudly ensures her timeless literary legacy continues to resonate across the nation and right here at home.”

The stamp is the 35th in the Literary Arts series and honors Jewett (1849-1909) as a foundational figure in American literary regionalism.

Through her fiction and essays, Jewett provided intimate portrayals of her characters and of the New England landscape and culture that shaped them. She sought to highlight the positive spirit of the region, an enduring model of harmony between individualism and communal values.

Jewett began publishing before age 20 and was firmly established as a writer by 1880. Although a 1902 accident ended her writing career, she continued to mentor younger writers, notably Willa Cather. She published hundreds of short stories, poetry, essays and some 18 novels in her lifetime. Her strong female characters have led to a renewed interest in her work.

Sarah Orne Jewett is a nondenominated, 3-ounce rate stamp. The words “THREE OUNCE” indicate its usage value. It is available in panes of 20 at Post Offices and usps.com.

Like a Forever stamp, it will always be valid for the rate printed on it.

Ethel Kessler, an art director for USPS, designed the stamp with art by Mark Summers.

Postal Products

Customers may purchase stamps and other philatelic products through The Postal Store at usps.com/shopstamps, by calling 844-737-7826, by mail through USA Philatelic, or at Post Office locations nationwide. For officially licensed stamp products, shop the USPS Officially Licensed Collection on Amazon. Additional information on stamps, first-day-of-issue ceremonies and stamp-inspired products can be found at stampsforever.com.

# # #

Hawkins appeared in federal court for his arraignment before United States Magistrate Judge Martin A. Fitzpatrick in Tallahassee, Florida. Jury trial is scheduled for September 29, 2026, before Chief District Court Judge Allen C. Winsor.

Hawkins faces up to 10 years’ imprisonment on the possession of a machine gun count; up to 10 years’ imprisonment on the possession of Postal Service key count; and up to five years’ imprisonment on the possession of stolen mail count.

This case was jointly investigated by the United States Postal Inspection Service, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Leon County Sheriff’s Office. Assistant United States Attorney Emma Schwan is prosecuting the case.

An indictment is merely an allegation by a grand jury that a defendant has committed a violation of federal criminal law and is not evidence of guilt. All defendants are presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial, during which it will be the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) is the Department of Justice’s nationwide initiative that brings federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement, prosecutors, and other public safety partners together to coordinate efforts to combat violent crime and make communities safe. Coordinated by U.S. Attorneys’ offices in each of the 94 federal districts, PSN is tailored to particular communities to strategically address specific violent crime and public safety challenges. As a key component of Operation Take Back America, PSN serves a central role in the Department’s commitment to make our country safe. PSN emphasizes three core principles: rapid federal response to violent crime and criminal offenders; strong, strategic partnerships among law enforcement at all levels; and accountability and deterrence through the prosecution of the most serious, readily provable offenses and other strategies. These efforts complement and strengthen President Trump’s Homeland Security Task Forces, ensuring a comprehensive federal response to the most pressing public safety issues facing communities.

The United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Florida is one of 94 offices that serve as the nation’s principal litigators under the direction of the Attorney General. To access available public court documents online, please visit the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida website. For more information about the United States Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Florida, visit https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndfl.

Federal regulations prohibit favoritism in hiring, promotions

Federal prosecutors on Wednesday charged postmaster Mary Cardille with misappropriating post office funds. Officials said she took about $14,000.

Prosecutors charged Cardille, 62, of Macedonia, by way of an information, meaning she agreed to bypass grand jury proceedings. Such filings typically indicate that a defendant intends to plead guilty. An arraignment date has not yet been set. Read more at Cleveland.com

Former Gates Mills postmaster sentenced to prison for theft

10/30/2015 – The former postmaster of the Gates Mills Post Office was sentenced to 10 months in prison and ordered to repay approximately $57,000 that she stole, said Steven M. Dettelbach, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, and Monica Weyler, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Postal Service — Office of Inspector General, Eastern Area Field Office.

Ann Apana, 66, of Maple Heights, Ohio, was previously found  on one count of theft of property used by the U.S. Postal Service.

From at least June 12, 2009 until June 15, 2014, as part of a continuing course of conduct, Apana stole approximately $38,741.42 in money and merchandise from the Postal Service and made approximately $18,341.08 in unauthorized purchases of postage using customers’ credit card information.

“The vast majority of the Postal Service’s 600,000 employees are hardworking, dedicated individuals worthy of the American public’s trust,” Weyler said. “Unfortunately, a small few decide to take advantage of that trust and steal from their employer and customers. Today’s sentence shows that special agents with the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General work diligently to identify those few individuals, and seek their prosecution and removal from employment. The message is clear — if you steal from the Postal Service, you will go to jail and lose your job.”

This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Miranda E. Dugi following an investigation by special agents of the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General.

Courtney J. Ellis, 45, was sentenced to seven years, followed by three years supervised release for assaulting a postal worker while they were performing their official duties. Ellis pleaded guilty to the assault earlier this year.

According to court documents, on June 18, 2025, Ellis struck the victim on the head with a wooden board while he was delivering mail to Ellis’s address. The victim, who was delivering mail along that route for the first time, was wearing a USPS uniform and driving a marked USPS delivery vehicle. After striking the victim, Ellis yelled that he didn’t belong in the neighborhood and followed him back to his vehicle where he continued to yell at and threaten the victim.

This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Randall D. Eggert. It was investigated by the United States Postal Inspection Service and the Springfield, Mo., Police Department.

Operation Take Back America

This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime.