Washington – As voters prepare for the midterm elections in November, a key case is on the Supreme Court’s agenda. The court will decide whether states can count mail ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive late.
This case, known as Watson v. RNC, specifically addresses Mississippi’s deadline for accepting late mail ballots. The conflict revolves around whether state laws align with federal regulations that set Election Day as the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
Former President Trump has consistently criticized mail voting, labeling it “corrupt” and advocating for stricter regulations. After returning to the White House, he signed an executive order to reform U.S. elections, though some provisions faced legal challenges.
Currently, all 50 states require ballots to be submitted by Election Day. However, 14 states and the District of Columbia allow ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive later. Moreover, 29 states accept some military and overseas ballots received after Election Day, as noted by the National Conference of State Legislatures.
In contrast, Kansas, North Dakota, Ohio, and Utah passed laws last year ending grace periods, mandating that all mail ballots must arrive by Election Day.
Kristin Connelly, the clerk-recorder for Contra Costa County, California, argues, “Allowing late ballots ensures we receive all timely votes.” In California, ballots postmarked by Election Day can be counted up to seven days after.
This Supreme Court case is one of three related to elections for the current term, all likely to impact voting rights. A decision could modify how campaigns and elections are managed.
Mississippi’s law permits mail ballots to be counted if received up to five days after Election Day, as long as they are postmarked by then. The Republican National Committee and Mississippi’s Libertarian Party argue that the grace period conflicts with federal law established in the 1800s, which mandates ballots be in by Election Day.
Initially, a U.S. district court upheld Mississippi’s law, stating it did not contradict federal statutes. However, the 5th Circuit Court later overturned that, declaring federal law takes precedence, and ballots must be received by Election Day.
David Becker, an expert on election law, states, “The heart of this matter is whether states hold the constitutional power to set their own rules.” Supporters of retaining grace periods caution that a ruling against them could undermine the rights of military and overseas voters, a group that includes millions of Americans.
In court, Secretary of State Michael Watson defended Mississippi’s law, emphasizing states’ authority under the Constitution to regulate federal elections. Critics of grace periods argue allowing ballots to arrive late can lead to fraud and logistical chaos.
However, experts point out that mail-in voting fraud is extremely rare. Becker insists that the fear of widespread fraud is unfounded, stating, “If someone tries to submit a fraudulent mail ballot, they risk a serious criminal record.”
As the midterm elections loom, a decision from the Supreme Court is expected soon. Concerns abound that striking down grace periods could leave states scrambling to adjust their procedures. Connelly suggests a sudden change would add confusion for voters, especially in smaller counties with limited resources for voter education.
In the 2024 general election, Contra Costa County saw over 12,000 mail ballots counted during California’s grace period, with a majority eligible for counting. Connelly highlights the need for states to manage their own voter regulations effectively, reinforcing that they best understand their constituents’ needs.
While federal legislation, like the Voting Rights Act, has a crucial role in shaping elections, Connelly hopes the Supreme Court will respect Mississippi’s choice in determining its ballot-receipt policy.
For more information on voting regulations, refer to resources from the National Conference of State Legislatures that detail each state’s voting requirements.
