>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
“We have lots of phrases that involve two words, the last of which, the second of which is ‘DAY’,” Alito said from the bench. “Labor Day, Memorial Day, George Washington’s birthday, Independence Day, and Election Day.”
“And they’re all particular days,” he continued. “So if we start with that, if I have nothing more to look at than the phrase election day, I think this is the day in which everything is going to take place, or almost everything.”
Alito’s remarks appeared to echo a broader concern among conservative legal advocates: that allowing ballots to trickle in days after polls close effectively extends the election, potentially opening the door to confusion, delays, and disputes.
Attorneys representing the Republican National Committee argued forcefully that Congress has already set the rules. Federal statutes establish a single day for choosing federal officials, they said, and that deadline should be treated as firm.
From their perspective, ballots arriving after Election Day violate the plain meaning of federal law and create an uneven playing field across states.
Supporters of Mississippi’s law pushed back, emphasizing that states have long been responsible for managing the mechanics of elections. They argued that setting reasonable deadlines tied to postmarks is part of that authority, especially given real-world challenges like mail delays.
They also pointed to military and overseas voters, who often depend on extended timelines due to international shipping constraints. A strict “received by Election Day” rule, they warned, could disenfranchise those serving abroad.
Mississippi’s current system requires absentee ballots to be postmarked by Election Day and delivered within five days to be counted. Other states go even further. Illinois, for example, allows ballots to arrive up to two weeks after Election Day under similar conditions.
Still, critics say these extended windows blur the line of when an election actually ends.
Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, underscored that concern in comments to The Center Square.
“Federal law clearly states that ballots must be received by Election Day,” Snead said. “Despite this, states continue to allow absentee ballots to pour in days or even weeks late.”
The issue gained prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic, when many states expanded mail-in voting and loosened deadlines in response to public health concerns. What was initially framed as a temporary measure has, in many places, become a lasting feature of election administration.
At the same time, federal law already includes provisions designed to protect absentee voters overseas. The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act requires ballots to be sent out well in advance, giving those voters time to return them before Election Day.
Public opinion appears to favor stricter deadlines. A recent survey conducted by CRC Research found that a strong majority of likely voters believe ballots should be received by the close of polls on Election Day to ensure election security. Support for that position spanned party lines, though it was strongest among Republicans.
Now, all eyes turn to the Supreme Court.
A decision is expected by late June, and its impact could be sweeping. If the Court sides with challengers, states may be forced to overhaul their mail-in voting systems, tightening deadlines and redefining how elections are conducted.
If not, the current patchwork system will likely remain in place—fueling an ongoing national debate over fairness, security, and the very meaning of Election Day itself.
One thing is clear: the Court’s ruling won’t just settle a legal question. It could redefine the rules of American elections for years to come.
