Supreme Court endorses post-Election Day mail-in ballot counting ahead of midterms
Source: Courthouse News Service
June 29, 2026
WASHINGTON (CN) The Supreme Court ruled against Republicans attack on mail-in ballots on Monday, shoring up election rules in over a dozen states ahead of the midterms.
Nearly 200 years ago, Congress mandated federal elections be held uniformly on one Tuesday in November every other year. Accordingly, all states require ballots to be cast by federal Election Day. But since states have authority over the time, manner and places of such elections, nearly 30 states and the District of Columbia allow at least some ballots that are cast by Election Day to be counted if they are received soon after that.
In 2020, the Mississippi Legislature enacted one such law, permitting absentee ballots to be counted as long as they were postmarked on or before the date of the election and received by the registrar no more than five business days after the election. The Republican National Committee argued that in practice, Mississippis law meant the election no longer ended on Election Day.
When the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in March, the conservative justices worried that without finality on Election Day, the public would lose trust in the electoral process. However, the liberal justices balked at their conservative colleagues policy concerns, noting the question before them was whether federal election statutes barred states from making such laws. The state says its law ensures ballots are not rejected because of minor mail delivery delays. Republicans argue election officials convenience comes at the cost of the Constitution.
Read more: https://www.courthousenews.com/supreme-court-endorses-post-election-day-mail-in-ballot-counting-ahead-of-midterms/
Link to ORDER (PDF) - Watson v rnc - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1260_g3cn.pdf
creeksneakers2
(8,085 posts)Bettie
(20,018 posts)and in a good way for once!
sheshe2
(99,084 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(106,887 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(18,268 posts)Trumpedo loses another one.
I, too, am shocked, but in a good way.
Cheezoholic
(4,138 posts)Its the post marked by election day part that would be hard for the court to ignore. Ruling against this would open the door for a calamity of cases against states rights. That's why I think it's hard to ignore states rights here considering how plain the language of the law is, even with this court IMO.
LetMyPeopleVote
(184,142 posts)Its the high courts latest election-related ruling ahead of the November midterms.
In a win for voting rights, the Supreme Court says mail-in ballots received after election day WILL count.
— MS NOW (@ms.now) 2026-06-29T14:24:19.385Z
www.ms.now/deadline-whi...
https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-mississippi-mail-ballots-watson
Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the opinion for a 5-4 court, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the three Democratic appointees, over dissent from Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
Rejecting a GOP challenge, Barrett said federal election laws dont pre-empt Mississippis law that has a five-day grace period for counting ballots that are postmarked by Election Day.
According to the Voting Rights Lab, 30 states have mail ballot grace periods for at least some voters: 14 states and Washington, D.C., have them for all mail ballots, while 16 more states have them specifically for military and overseas voters.....
The Trump administration supported the GOPs challenge, as President Donald Trump has railed against mail ballots while making unproven voter fraud claims. At the March hearing, Mississippis lawyer said the federal government has sounded the anti-fraud theme but couldnt show a single example of fraud from post-Election Day ballot receipt in this century.
YodaMom2
(248 posts)He joins a decision that makes him seem like a reasonable balls and strikes constitutionalist, and then follows it with some psycho, fascist decision, one he needs cover for. End to birthright citizenship, perhaps?