Supreme Court Reviews Federal Election Day Law

On March 23, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the federal election law regarding Election Day, which supersedes state regulations allowing election officials to count mail-in ballots that arrive post-Election Day.

A coalition of conservative figures, including Senator Mike Lee from Utah, filed a brief urging the court to consider the potential consequences of states disregarding the Constitution, arguing that Election Day should not merely be a theoretical concept.

“Congress designated a single day for federal elections.”

This case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, stems from an ongoing dispute involving a Mississippi law initiated during the pandemic. This law permits counting absentee mail-in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day, even if received up to five business days later.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Mississippi Republican Party highlighted that mail-in voting often aligns closely with party lines, suggesting that additional days for counting late ballots could disproportionately favor Democrats.

Despite a reduction in the partisan divide since 2020, significant disparities still exist in the context of mail-in voting, especially in the upcoming 2024 elections, which may explain why certain Democratic groups are advocating for the continuation of such practices.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled in favor of Mississippi’s early voting law, stating it was invalidated by federal law. However, Mississippi has petitioned the Supreme Court to revisit this decision, aiming to secure the extended counting period for ballots.

Mississippi defended its position by asserting that federal law requires ballots to be cast by Election Day, but does not mandate their arrival by that same date.

Senator Lee, alongside eight other Republican senators and 15 Congressional colleagues, expressed their concerns in a brief filed with the American Center for Law and Justice, emphasizing that Mississippi’s absentee voting practices could jeopardize the integrity and consistency of elections, which are essential to democratic governance.

“Congress has exercised its constitutional authority to specify the timing and manner of federal elections,” Lee stated.

“Allowing states to count ballots received after Election Day undermines the clarity and trust that Congress aimed to establish by fixing a national election date,” he added.

Key points in the brief include:

• The argument that the purpose of federal election regulations is to prevent voter fraud and maintain uniformity in federal election processes.
• A dismissal of claims that strict adherence to these regulations undermines the principles of federalism.
• A caution that without a strict interpretation of Election Day provisions, the constitutional election framework may become unenforceable.

“The Constitution clearly mandates that Congress has the final say regarding the timing of federal elections,” the brief asserts, stressing Congress’s decision to select a specific date for elections.

The brief warns that misinterpretation of state laws regarding election timing could lead to serious issues like strategic voting and prolonged uncertainties—issues Congress intended to avoid.

“Treating Election Day as merely a conceptual idea could lead states to hold elections far beyond the designated Congressional election date,” it concludes, reiterating that counting late-arriving ballots undermines the electoral process.

Senator Lee expressed anticipation for a Supreme Court ruling that would prevent states from conducting indefinite regular elections, which he believes could introduce vulnerabilities to fraud and diminish public confidence in American elections.

If the Supreme Court affirms that federal law takes precedence over state law in this instance, it may set a precedent affecting 18 other states as well.