Supreme Court Ruling Could Alter Mail-In Ballot Rules, Impacting California and Other States
WASHINGTON – A Supreme Court decision, anticipated following Monday’s arguments, could significantly alter how mail-in ballots are counted across the United States, potentially forcing voters in some states to submit their ballots well before election day. The case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, centers on whether ballots must be received by election day to be considered valid under federal law.
The core of the dispute lies in the interpretation of a federal law establishing a national election day – the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. While Congress designated the day for elections in the 19th century, it did not specify when states must count those ballots. The Constitution grants states the authority to determine the “times, places and manners for holding elections.”
Currently, California and 13 other states allow ballots postmarked on or before election day to be counted even if they arrive a few days later. California, for example, counts ballots arriving within seven days of the election. In 2024, over 406,000 late-arriving ballots were tallied in the state, representing approximately 2.5% of all ballots cast. Other Western states – Washington, Oregon, Nevada, and Alaska – follow similar practices.
The Republican National Committee, along with plaintiffs in Mississippi, argue that “election day” inherently means ballots must be in the possession of election officials on that day. During oral arguments, the Supreme Court’s six conservative justices appeared receptive to this argument. Justice Samuel Alito Jr. expressed concern about the potential for late-arriving ballots to “flip the outcome” of an election, suggesting a risk of fraud.
Democrats and election law experts countered that this interpretation clashes with over a century of established practice, noting that many states historically accommodated voters submitting mail ballots while traveling. They drew a parallel to federal tax filing, where returns postmarked by the deadline are accepted even if received by the IRS a few days later.
The case originated in Mississippi, where a district judge initially rejected the Republican challenge. However, a panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, comprised of three Trump appointees, reversed that decision, ruling that ballots not received by election day are invalid.
The Supreme Court’s decision comes amid ongoing scrutiny of mail-in voting, fueled by repeated claims of fraud from former President Trump. The ruling could have a substantial impact on voter access and election administration, particularly in states that rely heavily on mail-in ballots.
California Governor Newsom recently addressed the situation, following the Supreme Court’s earlier allowance of a congressional map benefitting Democrats, signaling the state’s commitment to ensuring all legally cast votes are counted. https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiyAFBVV95cUxPaUV1WUlzVldBX292YmpRU2YzOFBJNHF6aDJUVUJyWktFTWdPQVJlRlFhSU1HNjRzakMzeFRDLTB6WnkyaHJWcVF4N1BrczAtX0k3WmpPMTZwRml4LWVKMmFkWEg0X240bHpiZmFuZW1LRUh2bERtNXlhclBta1BSLU1FbGhGRXRtejVta245T01xRFNKeFJQb08zcHpHa1hlcGxGV05mYng4bmxNckV4ZEpCckFBcmV5azltWkdHTEN6dXQ1TlVEWA?oc=5
While California has faced criticism for the time it takes to count all votes, this issue was not central to the arguments presented before the court. https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/watson-v-republican-national-committee/ The Supreme Court also recently allowed California to use a new congressional map intended to give Democrats five additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/02/supreme-court-allows-california-to-use-congressional-map-benefitting-democrats/
