...
By Giulia Carbonaro
Senior Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The Supreme Court appeared skeptical Monday of allowing states to count late-arriving mail-in ballots, in a case that could upend the upcoming midterm elections while likely pleasing President Donald Trump's administration.
Justices were considering the challenge brought about by the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) against a Mississippi state law, enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which allows ballots to be received up to five days after election day, as long as they are postmarked by then.
While a final ruling is still to be issued in the case, the court’s conservative majority—made up of John G. Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—seemed ready to stop the state, and several others with similar laws, from counting mail-in votes received after election day.
Read More on News
Why It Matters
The case has landed in front of the justices at a time when Trump and his administration are pushing for sweeping changes to the nation’s electoral system, including requiring all Americans to prove U.S. citizenship when registering to vote, and showing ID when voting in person or by mail.
Mail-in voting has been among the president’s targets for reform for years now, since he is convinced—incorrectly—that he lost the 2020 election because of them.
...
What To Know
Mississippi lawmakers passed the measure allowing late-arriving mail-in ballots in 2020 with a bipartisan and nearly unanimous vote. The law gave mail-in vote a short grace period of five days, as long as the ballots were postmarked by election day.
But the measure was questioned by the RNC, the Mississippi Republican Party, and a Mississippi voter and county election commissioner in a 2024 lawsuit which argued that the grace period approved by the red state violates federal laws setting election day for the first Tuesday of November.
A federal judge dismissed the case, but his ruling was reversed by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Mississippi then appealed to the Supreme Court.
The case goes beyond Mississippi alone, and is likely to impact at least 14 other states, Washington D.C., and three U.S. territories which have introduced similar laws allowing for late-arriving mail-in ballots to be counted. Some allow longer grace periods than Mississippi, and do not require the ballot to be postmarked on election day.
One of these states is presidential battleground Nevada, while most of the nation’s swing states, including Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, require ballots to be received by election day.
While Mississippi Solicitor General Scott G. Stewart has been defending the state’s right to decide its own election procedures, the conservative justices on Monday focused on fears that allowing late-arriving mail-in ballots could undermine Americans’ confidence in the electoral process and open the door to voters potentially “recalling ballots.”
Both Justices Alito and Kavanaugh raised the concern that the Mississippi law could make it easier for fraudulent votes to be cast and fuel voters’ confusion in case of contested results.
According to Alito, “confidence in election outcomes can be seriously undermined if the apparent outcome” of an election “is radically flipped by the acceptance later of a big stash” of ballots.
While liberal justices tried to push back on those arguments, they have a small chance of prevailing over the conservative supermajority. The case is likely to split the court along party lines, though there is a chance Roberts and Barrett might hold a different opinion than their fellow conservative justices.
Mississippi Secretary of State Michael Watson, a Republican defending the state law, said that federal law allows ballots cast by election day to be received later, asserting the legality of the state law.
What People Are Saying
Ally Triolo, the RNC’s election integrity communications director, said in a statement shared with Newsweek: “Watson v. RNC is about a simple principle: ballots must be received by Election Day. This prevents elections from dragging on for days and weeks after voters have cast their ballots, causing confusion and undermining our elections. 83 percent of voters agree ballots should be in by Election Day, and 78 percent say it makes elections more secure."
Mississippi solicitor general Scott G. Stewart told the justices in a statement reported by The Guardian on Monday: “History shows that election administration is dynamic. States have wide leeway. They just have to make sure that the voters make a choice by election day.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh said on Monday, quoting from an analysis by a New York University law professor: “‘The longer after election day any significant changes in vote totals take place, the greater the risk that the losing side will cry the election has been stolen.’”
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on the case by June or July—only months before voters head to the ballots for the November midterms.
Update 3/26/26, 9:47 a.m. ET: This article was updated with comment from Ally Triolo of the Republican National Committee.
In a polarized era, the center is dismissed as bland. At Newsweek, ours is different: The Courageous Center—it's not "both sides," it's sharp, challenging and alive with ideas. We follow facts, not factions. If that sounds like the kind of journalism you want to see thrive, we need you.
When you become a Newsweek Member, you support a mission to keep the center strong and vibrant. Members enjoy: Ad-free browsing, exclusive content and editor conversations. Help keep the center courageous. Join today.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines