Supreme Court Case Could Change Mail-In Ballot Rules in California & Other States

Supreme Court Signals Potential Shift in Mail Ballot Rules, Impacting California Voters

WASHINGTON — Californians could face a tighter deadline for mailing in their ballots, potentially requiring them to submit votes significantly earlier than election day, following arguments heard Monday before the Supreme Court. The case centers on a challenge to state laws that currently allow ballots to be counted if postmarked by election day but arriving several days later, a practice common in several Western states.

The core of the dispute revolves around interpreting federal law regarding election day. While Congress established a national election day in November, it left the specifics of ballot counting to individual states, as outlined in the Constitution. Currently, California counts mail ballots arriving up to seven days after election day, a practice that saw over 406,000 ballots tallied in the 2024 election – roughly 2.5% of the total vote. Other states, including Washington, Oregon, Nevada, and Alaska, have similar provisions.

The Republican Challenge and Concerns Over “Late” Ballots

The Republican National Committee (RNC) initiated the legal challenge, arguing that “election day” inherently means ballots must be received by that date to be considered valid. This argument gained traction with the Supreme Court’s conservative justices, who expressed concerns about potential fraud and the integrity of the election process. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. Voiced a worry about a “big stash of ballots” arriving after election day potentially altering the outcome, highlighting the core concern driving the Republican challenge.

This case, Watson vs. Republican National Committee, originated in Mississippi, where state law allows ballots to arrive up to five days after election day. A district judge initially rejected the RNC’s claim, but a panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, comprised of three Trump appointees, reversed that decision, ruling that ballots must be received by election day to be legally counted.

A Century of Practice vs. A New Interpretation

Opponents of the RNC’s position, including Democrats and election law experts, contend that the proposed rule clashes with over a century of established practice. They point to the historical acceptance of mail-in voting for citizens traveling on election day as evidence that a strict “received by” deadline is not consistent with the intent of federal law. They also drew a comparison to the federal tax filing deadline, where returns postmarked by April 15th are accepted even if they arrive at the IRS a few days later.

What’s at Stake for California Voters?

If the Supreme Court sides with the RNC, California voters will need to adjust their voting strategies. Currently, the state advises voters to mail their ballots at least a week before election day to ensure timely arrival. A ruling enforcing a “received by” deadline would likely necessitate even earlier mailing, potentially weeks in advance, to account for postal service delivery times. This could disproportionately affect voters in rural areas or those with limited access to early voting locations.

Background: The Rise of Mail-In Voting and Recent Challenges

Mail-in voting has become increasingly prevalent in the United States, particularly in recent years. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a surge in mail ballot usage as states sought to provide safer voting options. However, this expansion has been met with resistance from some Republicans, including former President Trump, who have repeatedly made unsubstantiated claims of widespread voter fraud associated with mail-in ballots. The Associated Press reported on the Supreme Court’s previous rulings regarding election laws, noting a pattern of allowing states to implement maps favoring their dominant parties.

The Broader Context: Redistricting and Partisan Advantage

This case arrives amidst ongoing battles over voting rights and election integrity. The Supreme Court recently allowed California to use a new congressional map designed to benefit Democrats, rejecting a challenge from state Republicans and the Trump administration. This decision followed a similar ruling allowing Texas to use a Republican-friendly map, despite concerns about racial discrimination. As NPR detailed, both cases highlight a trend of states redrawing congressional districts to maximize partisan advantage.

What Happens Next?

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the Watson vs. Republican National Committee case in the coming weeks or months. If the Court sides with the RNC, state election officials will need to revise their procedures for counting mail ballots, potentially leading to significant changes in voting timelines and voter education efforts. California officials have not yet announced specific plans for responding to a potential adverse ruling, but they are likely to explore options for mitigating the impact on voters.

Details were not provided regarding potential legal challenges to the Supreme Court’s decision, should it favor the RNC. It remains unclear how states will adapt their voter education campaigns to reflect any new deadlines. The report did not specify the exact number of voters who might be affected by a stricter mail ballot deadline in California.