Tomorrow, the Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in an incredibly important case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, which asks the justices to decide what “election day” (or “the day for the election”) means. The decision could soon reshape mail-in voting rules nationwide.
In the case, Mississippi Secretary of State Michael Watson seeks review of a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit striking down the state’s law that lets it count absentee ballots postmarked by election day if they arrive up to five business days later.
The controversy originated in Mississippi, where a 2020 law (enacted amid the COVID-19 pandemic) allows absentee ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received within five business days afterward. The expansion of mail-in voting facilitates a system ripe for manipulation and potential voter fraud.
On Oct 25, 2024, a 5th Circuit 3-judge panel (which covers Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi) overruled a federal district court and ruled unanimously that the statute was superseded by federal law, which it read to require that all ballots be both cast and received by the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, per federal statutes (2 U.S.C. §§ 1 & 7, and 3 U.S.C. § 1) as requiring ballots to be both cast and received by Election Day, preempting conflicting state provisions.
The Constitution provides that “[t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.” In 1845, Congress – which has the power to determine when the president is elected – chose the Tuesday after the first Monday in November as “election day,” and in 1872 it directed that congressional elections should occur on this day, as well.
The 5th Circuit concluded that the date elections officials receive the ballot is all that matters. The date of mailing and the postmark are irrelevant. If a ballot hasn’t been received by election day, it’s too late. “Federal law requires voters to take timely steps to vote by Election Day,” Judge Oldham wrote: “And federal law does not permit the State of Mississippi to extend the period for voting by 1 day, 5 days, or 100 days.”
The full 5th Circuit denied rehearing the case by a 10-5 vote - with the five dissenting judges saying the case was of “exceptional importance.”
Lawsuit efforts against Mississippi were originally led by the RNC and Mississippi GOP, and soon after by Judicial Watch; all representing concerned Americans who continue to challenge Democrat-Controlled states that accept and count ballots 1-21 days after election day, making election day an “election season” - allowing the fraudulent manipulation of elections.
The 5th Circuit also concurred that allowing some states to randomly extend the election day by continuing to accept and process ballots received AFTER the date set for national elections disenfranchises those living in states that administer their elections in strict adherence to federal law.
Mississippi appealed to SCOTUS in June 2025, arguing “an ‘election’ is the conclusive choice of an officer” – which occurs by the deadline as long as voters cast their ballots by then, even if election officials do not receive them by that day. The state also argues an “election” occurs when voters make their choice by casting ballots, and ballot receipt and counting are administrative steps—and are not part of the election itself.
Lawyers for MS have argued that upholding a strict receipt deadline would jeopardize ballots for military and overseas voters. However, Congress’s passage of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Voting Act (UOCAVA) established requirements for states to send absentee ballots 45 days before a federal election.
In July, 2025 a group of 19 Democrat aligned states (CA, CO, CT, DE, HI, IL, MD, MA, MI, MN, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OR, RI, VT, WA, and DC) filed a “friend of the court” brief supporting Mississippi, saying the 5th Circuit’s ruling is “both wrong and destabilizing.”
The RNC has repeatedly cited federal law and argued that allowing late-arriving ballots risks post-election manipulation and undermines the constitutional requirement for One Election Day (citing Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67 (1997)).
Election Day is Election Day
At its core, tomorrow’s SCOTUS case examines whether federal statutes establishing a uniform “Election Day” — the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November — require that mail-in or absentee ballots for federal elections be received by election officials by the close of that day, or if states can continue counting ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive afterward.
Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, said, “Federal law clearly states that ballots must be received by election day. Despite this, states continue to allow absentee ballots to pour in days or even weeks late. The case will provide an opportunity to make mail-in ballot laws uniform across the country.”
All 50 states require ballots to be cast or postmarked on or before election day. 14 states & DC accept mailed ballots after election day - and vary considerably from 1 day after election day in Texas, 14 days after in Illinois, 17 days after in California, to the insane record holder of 21 days afterward in Washington…
Some states have acted on their own and eliminated grace periods with recently passed legislation (e.g., Ohio, Kansas, North Dakota, Utah, and Minnesota), where ballots must now be received by the close of polls on election day to be counted.
The North Dakota State Legislature's new law, HB 1165, passed the State House (91-1) and the State Senate (88-3) and is now in effect, requiring mail-in ballots to be received by the close of polls on Election Day (with limited exceptions, such as UOCAVA). Previously, North Dakota allowed absentee ballots to be counted if they were received within 13 days after the election.
Ohio’s SB 293 became law effective March 20, 2026, and eliminated the “grace period” for mail-in ballots, requiring ballots to arrive at the board of elections by the close of polls on election day to be counted (with limited exceptions, such as UOCAVA). “Election Day is Election Day for a reason,” Ohio State Senator Theresa Gavarone, said during debate over her state’s ban on the practice last year. “Allowing ballots to be delivered days after the election does nothing but hurt the integrity and credibility of our elections.”
Under the bill, the Ohio Secretary of State must review the state’s voter registration database monthly to verify citizenship. It will also require boards of election to immediately cancel voter registration for anyone flagged as a possible noncitizen, then conduct further investigations into their citizenship status.
These are all important steps. The risk of vote-by-mail fraud is so high that it was highlighted in the Carter-Baker Commission’s 2005 final report on federal election reform, which stated: “Absentee Ballots Remain the Largest Source of Potential Voter Fraud.” INTERESTINGLY - in response to the Commission’s very specific, numerous recommendations to tighten election security to restore faith and confidence in our elections, most Democrat-Controlled states responded by doing the exact opposite, implementing and expanding even MORE INSECURE Mail-in Voting policies.
In 2020, Joe Biden said, “We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive Voter Fraud organization in the history of American politics.”And since Democrats have been EXPANDING insecure voting mechanisms such as mail-in ballots, unconstitutional same-day registration - electronic poll pads - internet ‘on-demand ballots’ - remote ballot curing using Big Tech and Web apps to verify signatures - rampant ballot harvesting techniques including registering ‘voters’ and collecting ballots via mobile vans in Pima, County AZ and other measures such as CA’s outright BAN on local jurisdictions from requiring voter ID, and other Dem efforts making it easier to cheat than ever before.
Dems have figured out that it just takes one major urban jurisdiction where the fraud is easiest to obscure to manipulate and change election results (e.g. Bexar / Tarrant / Harris County, TX; Milwaukee County, WI; Philadelphia County, PA; Clark County, NV; King County, WA; Wayne County, MI; Fulton County, GA; Maricopa / PIMA County, AZ; Riverside County, CA etc.) and where it’s least likely to be successfully challenged, to benefit the party that controls the voting systems and offices of power of investigation and prosecution, allowing whatever it takes to keep power with just enough late-arriving ballots to magically overcome the Election Day vote-deficit and miraculously ‘win’ the election.
Mail-in voter fraud is an ongoing massive Racketeer enterprise. Another example: a truck driver for a USPS subcontractor transported about 288,000 (filled-out) mail-in ballots from Bethpage, NY, to Lancaster/Harrisburg, PA, in late Oct 2020. The case indicated interstate ballot trafficking fraud to benefit certain candidates. The USPS seems to have done everything possible to avoid responses to FOIA requests for details of parties who paid for as many as nine trucks loaded with ballots. A Maryland resident filed suit asking courts to intervene to prevent the USPS from handling mail-in ballots, out of concern for what they’ve uncovered from the 2020 elections and apparent cover-up since.
Also, last year, there was a BOMBSHELL REPORT by the FBI that confirmed Chinese operatives mass-produced counterfeit U.S. driver’s licenses as part of a broader scheme to flood the US election system with 50,000 fake mail-in ballots, benefiting Biden and the Democrats in 2020.
The opportunity for fraud in the present election systems continues to foment a complete lack of faith in election outcomes, and, until addressed, such controversy will continue to plague our elections.
If SCOTUS affirms the 5th Circuit, it will dramatically impact many of these Dem states’ practices and may impact rules in up to 30 states for military/overseas ballots. States like Washington would expect urgent changes to be in compliance, and many states’ future elections could face last-minute litigation and legal chaos.
The case builds on a Jan 2026 SCOTUS decision (Bost v. Illinois), allowing challenges to such laws on standing grounds. The court ruled 7-2 under Art III of the Constitution for challengers to state election laws. Specifically, Illinois’s rule allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by election day to be received and counted up to 14 days after election day - federal candidates for office have “standing” and have an “obvious personal stake” and a “concrete and particularized interest” in the rules that govern the counting of votes in their elections and CAN challenge state laws that allow mail-in ballots to be counted past election day.
Tomorrow’s SCOTUS case underscores broader tensions in U.S. election law; balancing uniform national standards for federal offices with states’ authority over election administration in an era of expanded mail-in voting.
A reversal would affirm that federal law does not preempt state-imposed mandate windows. The decision, expected by June 2026, will provide clarity ahead of future cycles and influence how millions vote by mail.
Having ALL election ballots required to be RECEIVED by election day should be a consistent, strictly adhered-to standard of conduct amongst all fifty states. Also, implementing basic voter ID and proof-of-citizenship requirements, along with other prudent election measures such as the SAVE America Act, is long overdue.
Without a doubt, allowing ballots received AFTER election day to be counted completely opens the door for fraud. Tomorrow’s case has massive nationwide ramifications for vote-by-mail rules. Most countries have banned mail-in voting, and until the U.S. does (except for overseas active duty military and the disabled), we will still experience significant fraud and corruption in our elections.
Share This Post...
