Supreme Court Ruling on Mail-in Ballots

The Supreme Court has decided that state laws permitting the counting of mail-in ballots received after Election Day do not breach federal law. This decision presents a setback for the Republican National Committee and the administration of President Donald Trump.

On Monday, the Court delivered a narrow 5-4 ruling which affirms that states can count mail-in ballots that are received after Election Day, as long as they were sent on or before that date.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the majority opinion, which was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The Court stated that “two principles are key here: First, post-Election Day receipts, considered by themselves, do not violate Election Day statutes.”

Secondly, state laws can take precedence over federal election day laws, but only “to the extent that the conflict escalates.” Even if the plaintiffs were right about the Mississippi law, they still wouldn’t win their claims in this instance. Receiving a ballot after Election Day is unlawful. [Emphasis added]

The framers understood the challenges in establishing election laws pertinent to all potential national conditions. Rather than constitutionalizing these laws, they opted to grant “discretionary power over elections” to some defined authority. Therefore, no such authority has been submitted to this court. Election Day regulations don’t mention ballot reception and can’t simply be added to the legislative wording chosen by Congress. [Emphasis added]

Justice Samuel Alito dissented from the ruling, a stance shared by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the dissenters.

“The court … concluded that the Election Day Act merely stipulates that each vote must be cast on or before Election Day,” wrote Alito for the minority.

However, if that is the extent of the election day regulations, it is unreasonable to assume that the whole electorate is making decisions on that day. Instead, voters would be making choices over an extended period leading up to Election Day, which clearly contradicts the intent of Election Day statutes. [Emphasis added]

Election Day is a designated date and does not stretch across multiple days. Election Day laws mandate that federal elections occur on that specific day. Yet, under the disputed Mississippi law, ballot collection would extend for an additional five days, meaning that there wouldn’t technically be an “election” until that duration concludes. Federal law requires that voting occurs on Election Day, overriding Mississippi’s legislation. [Emphasis added]

The case is Watson v. Republican National Committee no. 24–1260 in the United States Supreme Court.