Listen to this article
Average 5 minutes
The audio version of this article was created by AI-based technology. It can be mispronounced. We are working with our partners to continuously review and improve the results.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states can count votes that will arrive after Election Day, which is a persistent goal of President Donald Trump.
The 5-4 decision rejected a Republican-led attack on laws in more than half of the states and the District of Columbia that allow mail-in ballots to arrive and be counted a number of days after the election, as long as they are marked on election day. The result spares officials the headache of changing their voting rules just months before the 2026 midterm congressional elections.
In just over half of those states, the grace period applies only to ballots cast by military and overseas voters.
The legal challenge was part of Trump’s broader attack on multiple mail-in voting, which he said breeds fraud despite strong evidence to the contrary and years of experience in many states. Trump has also said that his loss to Joe Biden in 2020 was the result of fraud, despite more than 60 court decisions and his attorney general saying that the argument is unfair.
President Donald Trump wants to end mail-in voting, saying it’s the cause of ‘massive voter fraud’ in the US Andrew Chang examines what might be behind Trump’s aversion to mail-in voting and what he can actually do about it. Photos provided by Getty Images, The Canadian Press and Reuters.
Who benefits from limiting mail-in votes?
Limiting mail-in ballots may equally benefit Republicans since Democratic voters are traditionally more likely to use mail-in ballots than Republican voters.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the court’s majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and three independent justices.
Federal rules that set a single election day “leave open when those ballots must be received,” Barrett wrote.
The US Congress can change the law, he said. “If the various polling stations demand a national solution, the American people must choose it through their elected representatives,” Barrett wrote.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the four-judge dissent.
“Not only is today’s decision inconsistent with the statutory text, legal context, historical practice, and precedent; it also threatens to produce dire consequences,” Alito wrote. “The majority’s holding creates confusion over troubling questions of election law and risks further undermining Americans’ confidence in the integrity of elections.”
Democrats have accused Trump of pursuing measures that will make it harder for people to vote, especially groups that favor the Democratic Alliance.
Trump called the court’s decision a “huge loss” and renewed his call for Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, which made it through the House but not the Senate.
“There is only one reason to object – DECEPTION!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
‘Freedom’
Among other changes, the law will limit who can get a postal vote and impose a requirement for documents proving citizenship to register to vote.
“If we want fair and secure elections, Election Day must mean exactly what it says, which is why this decision makes it even more important that Congress pass the SAVE America Act,” Republican National Committee Chairman Joe Gruters said in a statement.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer welcomed Monday’s decision.
“As the midterm elections approach, Trump and his allies are working overtime to shut down the American people’s votes. Senate Democrats will continue to do everything they can to protect free and fair elections, where everyone’s voice is heard,” Schumer said.
Rebekah Caruthers, president and CEO of the voting rights group Fair Elections Center, said the decision “affirms a basic principle: voters who follow the rules and cast their ballots on time should not lose their voice because of delays beyond their control.”
“By upholding the postal laws, the court is protecting the millions who rely on voting by mail — especially seniors, rural voters, people with disabilities and military and overseas voters,” Caruthers said.
The court heard arguments in March in a case from Mississippi that pits the state against the Republican Trump administration and the Republican and Libertarian parties. The issue was that state law sets a single election day that requires ballots to be voted on by voters and accepted by state officials.
An appeals court in New Orleans struck down a Mississippi law that allows ballots to be counted if they arrive within five business days of the election and are marked on election day.
The result is “a sigh of relief” for many election administrators, said Stephen Richer, a Republican and former top director of elections in Arizona’s Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix.
A ruling in favor of the Republican National Committee “would have created a lot of administrative challenges in the states that were affected,” said Richer, who is a staff attorney at the Cato Institute.
