Supreme Court Ruling on Mail-In Voting Raises Concerns

Justice Samuel Alito expressed concerns on Monday regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling on mail-in voting, suggesting it could lead to an increase in voter fraud.

In a narrow 5 to 4 decision delivered in an article by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the Supreme Court determined that federal law permits states to count non-military mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day. Alito’s dissent highlighted the risk of “voter fraud” that could further erode trust in the integrity of elections.

“Various sources indicate that voting by mail heightens the likelihood of fraud,” Alito noted, pointing to a 2005 commission led by former President Jimmy Carter, which identified absentee voting as a significant source of potential voter fraud in U.S. elections.

Alito and the other conservative justices referenced a 2008 case where the late Justice John Paul Stevens acknowledged that the possibility of fraud through absentee ballots was real and could influence the results of closely contested elections.

Alito further argued against the Supreme Court’s decision, questioning whether a voter’s choice is truly final if mail-in ballots can be received after the election. “Is a ballot that arrives in your mailbox really definitive?” he continued, critiquing the majority for avoiding this issue.

Law professor Jonathan Turley noted that several lawmakers reacted critically to the ruling, with some expressing disbelief.

Senator Eric Schmidt from Missouri stated that the court’s opinion was “stunningly wrong.” Arizona Representative Abe Hamadeh also weighed in, calling the decision “disastrous,” arguing in a social media post that it threatens to distract from the significance of Election Day as elections become tangled in endless mail-in ballots and counting.