Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. U.S. Postal Serv.

• Decision Date: 10 October 2020
• Docket Number: No. 20-cv-2295(EGS),20-cv-2295(EGS)
• Citation: 496 F.Supp.3d 1
• Parties: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR the ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Columbia

496 F.Supp.3d 1

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR the ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, Plaintiff,

v.UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, et al., Defendants.

No. 20-cv-2295(EGS)

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

Signed October 10, 2020

Allison Marcy Zieve, Public Citizen Litigation Group, Washington, DC, Samuel Spital, NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., New York, NY, for Plaintiff.

Joseph Evan Borson, Kuntal Virendra Cholera, John Robinson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

EMMET G. SULLIVAN, United States District Judge

I. Introduction

Plaintiff, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People ("NAACP") filed this lawsuit against Defendants the United States Postal Service ("USPS" or "Postal Service") and Louis DeJoy ("Mr. DeJoy"), in his official capacity as Postmaster General of the United States, alleging the following claims: (1) Non-statutory review of unlawful agency action for failure to follow the procedures required by 39 U.S.C. § 3661 ; (2) Non-statutory review of unlawful agency action that is arbitrary, capricious, and not in accordance with 39 U.S.C. § 101(e) ; (3) Mandamus to enforce 29 U.S.C. § 3991; and (4) Mandamus to enforce 39 U.S.C. § 101(e). Plaintiff seeks a preliminary injunction with regard to their first and second claims. Upon consideration of Plaintiff's motion, the response, and reply thereto, the applicable law, and the entire record, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion.

II. Background

A. Statutory and Regulatory Framework

In the Postal Reorganization Act ("PRA"), Public Law 91-375, 84 Stat. 719 (Aug. 12, 1970), Congress replaced the Post Office Department with the Postal Service as "an independent establishment of the executive branch of the Government of the United States, under the direction of a Board of Governors, with the Postmaster General as its chief executive officer." 39 C.F.R. § 1.1. The PRA establishes that the policy of the USPS includes the mandate to "provide prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all areas and ... render postal services to all communities." 39 U.S.C. § 101. The PRA also created an independent oversight body for the USPS, the Postal Rate Commission. 39 U.S.C. § 501. Congress passed the PRA to "[i]nsulate" the management of the USPS "from partisan politics ... by having the Postmaster General responsible to the [Postal Rate] Commission, which represents the public interest only, for his conduct of the affairs of the Postal Service." H.R. Rep. No. 91-1104, 3660-61 (1970).

In the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act ("PAEA"), Pub. L. No. 109-435, 120 Stat. 3198 (Dec. 20, 2006) (codified at 39 U.S.C. § 3600 et seq.), Congress replaced the Postal Rate Commission with the Postal Regulatory Commission ("PRC" or "Commission") and "strengthened its role." Carlson v. Postal Regul. Comm'n , 938 F.3d 337, 340 (D.C. Cir. 2019).

The USPS is responsible for "develop[ing] and promot[ing] adequate and efficient postal services." 39 U.S.C. § 3661(a). "When the Postal Service determines that there should be a change in the nature of postal services [that] will generally affect service on a nationwide or substantially nationwide basis," it must "submit a proposal, within a reasonable time prior to the effective date of such proposal, to the Postal Regulatory Commission requesting an advisory opinion on the change." Id. § 3661(b).

Following the submission of a proposal, "[t]he Commission shall not issue its opinion on any proposal until an opportunity for hearing on the record under [the Administrative Procedure Act] has been accorded the Postal Service, users of the mail, and an officer of the Commission who shall be required to represent the interests of the general public. The opinion shall be in writing and shall include a certification by each Commissioner agreeing with the opinion that in his judgment the opinion conforms to the policies established under this title." 39 U.S.C. § 3661(c).

B. Factual Background

1. The COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Impact on Voting in the 2020 Election.¹

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization ("WHO") declared a global pandemic as a result of the spread of COVID-19. See Dr. Tedros Adhanom, WHO Director-General's Opening Remarks at the Media Briefing on COVID-19 (Mar. 11, 2020), https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19–––11-march-2020. On March 13, 2020, President Donald J. Trump declared a national emergency as a result of the outbreak. Proclamation No. 9994, 85 Fed. Reg. 15,337 (Mar. 18, 2020).

The virus that causes COVID-19 is highly contagious, is believed to spread mostly from person-to-person when people are in within six feet of each other, and may be spread by people who are not showing symptoms of the virus. See Centers for Disease Control, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): How to Protect Yourself and Others (last updated Sep. 11, 2020), https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/prevention.html. Symptoms range from mild to severe. See Mayo Clinic, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), Symptoms and Causes (updated Sep. 11, 2020), https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/symptoms-causes/syc-20479963. Older people and people with existing chronic medical conditions have a higher risk of serious illness from COVID-19. Id. Such chronic medical conditions include "serious heart disease ..., cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type 2 diabetes, severe obesity, chronic kidney disease, sickle cell disease, and weakened immune system from solid organ transplants." Id. COVID-19 can result in severe medical complications including "pneumonia and trouble breathing, organ failure in more than one organ, heart problems, acute respiratory distress syndrome, blood clots, acute kidney injury, and additional viral and bacterial infections." Id. A disproportionate number of black people have been infected and killed by the disease.

The COVID Tracking Project, The COVID Racial Data Tracker , https://covidtracking.com/race.

As of October 10, 2020, just over one million people worldwide, and 214,004 Americans have died from COVID-19. See Johns Hopkins University, Coronavirus Resource Center, https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html. Also as of October 6, 2020, over 37 million people worldwide have been infected, with the United States having more infections than any other country, with just over seven and a half million infections. Id.

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC") has provided guidance to voters and election polling locations to prevent the spread of the disease, including recommending "a wide variety of voting options ... such as alternative voting options that minimize contact." See CDC, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Considerations for Election Polling Locations and Voters, Interim Guidance to Prevent Spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) (last updated June 22, 2020), https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/election-polling-locations.html. Consistent with this guidance, states have enacted temporary changes for the 2020 election including expanding the ability to vote by mail. Nat'l Conference of State Legislatures, COVID-19 and Elections, (last updated Oct. 2, 2020), https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-mail-voting-policies-in-effect-for-the-2020-election.aspx.

2. USPS Implements Changes that Lead to Nationwide Mail Delays

The key changes that Plaintiff challenges are the prohibition on "late trips" and "extra trips" (collectively "Transportation Policy Changes")² announced on July 10, 2020.³ Reply, ECF No. 25 at 9.⁴ Defendants have since clarified that late or extra trips are not "banned"; however, they acknowledge that they continue "at a reduced level" that began in July 2020. Suppl. Cintron Decl., ECF No. 24-3 ¶ 4. By August 13, 2020, the USPS had reduced the number of late trips by 71 percent. Email from Mr. DeJoy to All Employees ("August 13, 2020 Email"), Aug. 13, 2020, ECF No. 25-1. Mr. DeJoy acknowledged that the "transformative initiative has had unintended consequences that impacted our overall service levels." Id. at 2. On September 21, 2020, USPS issued "Operational Instructions" providing that "transportation, in the form of late or extra trips that are reasonably necessary to complete timely mail delivery, is not to be unreasonably restricted or prohibited. Managers are authorized to use their best business judgment to meet our service commitments." Ex. 1 to Notice Suppl. Material, ECF No. 29-1 at 4.

It is undisputed that the USPS did not seek an advisory opinion pursuant to 39 U.S.C. § 3661(b) from the PRC prior to implementing these changes.

C. Procedural Background

Plaintiff filed this lawsuit on August 20, 2020. On September 1, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, which requests that the Court enjoin Defendants from enforcing certain USPS policies and practices. See Mem. in Supp. of Mot. for Prelim. Inj. ("Mot."), ECF No. 8-1. Defendants filed their opposition on September 11, 2020. See Defs.’ Opp'n Mot. Prelim. Inj. ("Defs.’ Opp'n"), ECF No. 21. Plaintiff filed its reply brief on September 16, 2020. See Pls.’ Reply ("Reply"), ECF No. 25. The motion is ripe for the Court's consideration.

III. Standard of Review

"A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish [1] that [it] is likely to succeed on the merits, [2] that [it] is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, [3] that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and [4] that an injunction is in the public interest.’ " Aamer v. Obama , 742 F.3d 1023, 1038 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (alteration in original) (quoting Sherley v. Sebelius , 644 F.3d 388, 392 (D.C. Cir. 2011) ). Where the federal government is the opposing party, the balance of equities and public interest factors merge. See Nken v. Holder , ...