The Supreme Court on Monday upheld Mississippi’s election law permitting mail-in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day to be counted for up to five days afterward, delivering a significant legal victory for Democrats and leaving similar ballot-counting procedures intact in numerous other states ahead of the midterm elections.

The Court ruled 5-4 that federal law does not require every ballot to be physically received by Election Day. Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the Court’s three liberal justices in the majority, concluding that Congress never mandated a ballot receipt deadline tied to Election Day.

Writing for the majority, Barrett emphasized that election administration has historically been left largely to lawmakers rather than the judiciary.

“The Framers recognized the difficulty of crafting election laws ‘applicable to every probable change in the situation of the country,’” Barrett wrote in the majority opinion. “So instead of constitutionalizing election law, they decided that ‘a discretionary power over election’ needed to be lodged ‘somewhere.’”

She added that the Court could not rewrite statutes enacted by Congress.

“Suffice it to say, that power was not lodged in this Court. The election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose.”

The dispute, Watson v. RNC, originated from a lawsuit filed in 2024 by the Republican National Committee along with several local Republican organizations challenging Mississippi’s policy of accepting ballots arriving within five days after Election Day, provided they were mailed on time.

The decision could have implications well beyond Mississippi. At least 13 states have comparable grace periods for mail ballots, while nearly 30 states permit certain categories of absentee or mail voters additional time to submit ballots. California has become particularly well known for extended ballot counting, with statewide races often remaining undecided for days or even more than a week after voting concludes.

Barrett also pointed to congressional language as further support for the majority’s interpretation of federal election law.

“The electorate’s choice is made when voting is complete, not when ballots are received,” Barrett wrote. “The most recent amendment to the Presidential election-day statute bears this out. In 2022, Congress inserted the phrase ‘election day’ into that statute and marked that day as a specific Tuesday. It then created an exception: When States ‘modif[y] the period of voting.’”

She continued:

“That Congress defined ‘election day’ with reference to ‘voting’ indicates that ‘voting’ is the act governed by the statute.”

President Trump has consistently argued that ballots should not be counted after Election Day, and his Justice Department supported the Republican National Committee’s challenge to Mississippi’s law.

When the Court heard oral arguments in March, the justices appeared sharply divided over the issue. Several questioned whether invalidating Mississippi’s law might also cast doubt on longstanding early voting practices used across the country.

“It just seems inconceivable that on the basis of this kind of evidence, we would reject these practices that are so entrenched in 30 states,” liberal Justice Elena Kagan said at one point.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson likewise expressed skepticism toward the RNC’s position, suggesting that any changes to election law should come from Congress rather than the courts.

“The worry is that you want this court to decide the case rather than have Congress do it.”

Four conservative justices — Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh — dissented from the ruling. In his dissent, Alito argued that federal law plainly establishes a single Election Day and that ballots arriving afterward should not be included in the final tally.

“If ballots received after election day are added to the set of ballots that dictate the election’s outcome, the electorate’s choice does not occur on election day, and the federal election-day statutes are violated,” he wrote.

Alito also rejected the majority’s interpretation that the law simply requires voters to cast their ballots by Election Day.

“But if that is all that the election-day statutes require, there is no sense in which the electorate as a whole can be seen as making its choice on election day,” he contended.

The ruling comes as President Trump continues urging Congress to tighten federal election laws, including restrictions on mail-in voting and a nationwide proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections. Among the measures he has championed is the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act, legislation that has yet to advance through the Senate.

{Matzav.com}