The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Monday to take a case that could decide the fate of all mail-in ballots received late, The Hill reported. The Republican National Committee has sued over the practice of allowing ballots received after the polls are closed but postmarked on Election Day to be counted.
A lower court in Mississippi ruled that allowing late arrivals to still be counted is a violation of federal election laws. According to those laws, Election Day is defined as the first Tuesday in November, and Republicans believe that states that allow ballots to be counted after that day are breaking the law.
"Allowing states to count large numbers of mail-in ballots that are received after Election Day undermines trust and confidence in our elections," argued Joe Gruters, chairman of the RNC. "Elections must end on Election Day, which is why the RNC led the way in challenging this harmful state law," Gruters added.
"The RNC has been hard at work litigating this case for nearly two years, and we hope the Supreme Court will affirm the Fifth Circuit’s landmark decision that mail-in ballots received after Election Day cannot be counted," the statement concluded. The case is expected to be decided at the High Court in the spring or summer.
Shockingly, the challenge to the law is occurring between the Republican Party officials in Mississippi and the RNC, essentially pitting the local and national parties against each other. "The stakes are high: ballots cast by—but received after—election day can swing close races and change the course of the country," the Mississippi attorney general's office noted.
The RNC stated that, for its part, the lower court was correct in its assertion regarding the conflict with federal law. "It should await a case where the lower court answers the question presented incorrectly, should one ever arise," legal filings from the RNC said.
At least one aspect is off the table as the state of Mississippi agrees that the RNC has a stake in the issue and therefore has standing.. This will allow the Supreme Court to decide the merits of the case rather than dismissing the case out of hand because of a technicality.
This precise scenario occurred in the case brought by Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL) and two of President Donald Trump's electors, who were barred from challenging an Illinois law that allowed late-received ballots to count. According to Capitol News Illinois, Bost and the delegates attempted to sue the Illinois State Board of Elections in 2022 over the issue of accepting ballots up to 14 days after Election Day.
While their challenge had merit, the problem is that both a lower federal trial court and the federal court of appeals denied the lawsuit, stating that Bost had no standing. However, Bost's attorney, Paul Clement, argued that the additional cost to the campaign for the extended campaign had an impact on Bost. "Everybody would like the elections to be conducted lawfully and in compliance with federal law, including the voters, but the injury is visited more specifically on the candidate," Clement said
Trump has made election security one of his signature causes in his second term. After the changes to procedure that came in 2020 and Trump's subsequent loss, the president has set his sights on tightening up these loopholes and procedural gray areas. As the Associated Press reported, Trump signed an executive order to that effect on March 25.
The order included provisions regarding Election Day deadlines as well as a requirement for proof of citizenship for voter registration, and this predictably sparked an immediate challenge. David Becker, former attorney for the Justice Department, was one who vehemently denied the validity of the order.
"This cannot be done through executive action," said Becker, who heads the Center for Election Innovation and Research nonprofit. "Look, the Constitution was very clear: The president is not king," he added, arguing that election laws are "it’s always done through Congress" and not the president.
"The president doesn’t get to establish executive orders that affect the states with the swipe of a pen. If he wants to affect funding, he has to go through Congress to do that," Becker said by way of a comparison.
The left has pushed these policies that challenge the boundaries and have made elections run on for weeks past the customary time frame. This matter must be settled if Americans are to trust the process and candidates are to receive a fair shake. Now, it will be up to the Supreme Court to be the final arbiter of such a decision.
