Supreme Court Hears Landmark Case on Whether Federal Law Bars Counting Ballots Received After Election Day

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the consolidated high-stakes election integrity cases—Watson v. Republican National Committee and the companion Libertarian Party of Mississippi v. Wetzel—that could fundamentally reshape how federal elections are conducted nationwide.

MASSIVE: TODAY is @JudicialWatch Supreme Court argument that could result in STOPPING over 30 states from counting of ballots that arrive days and weeks AFTER Election Day. Most important election integrity case in modern history.pic.twitter.com/6hLnvGhuGI

— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) March 23, 2026

Judicial Watch, representing the Libertarian Party of Mississippi and partnered with former Solicitor General Paul Clement, argued that federal Election Day statutes (including 3 U.S.C. § 1 and provisions dating back to 1845) require ballots not only to be cast or postmarked by Election Day but also received by election officials on or before that uniform national deadline. The Fifth Circuit previously struck down Mississippi’s law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted if received up to five days after Election Day, finding it preempted by federal law. A Supreme Court ruling in favor of the challengers could invalidate similar “grace period” laws in more than a dozen states, potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of ballots in future elections.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton described the case as “the most important election integrity case in modern history,” asserting that permitting ballots to “trickle in” days or even weeks after Election Day undermines the single, uniform Election Day set by Congress, creates opportunities for fraud, and erodes public confidence. “Federal law sets one Election Day. That deadline should be enforced,” Fitton stated. The petitioners contend that the ordinary historical meaning of “election” includes the full process up to receipt of ballots, and that post-Election Day counting represents a modern departure without strong precedent.

During oral arguments, Justice Samuel Alito delivered a sharp analogy to counter arguments for flexibility in ballot receipt deadlines, emphasizing the fixed and precise nature of federal Election Day. He stressed that Congress established a single, uniform Election Day—the Tuesday after the first Monday in November—with a clear, non-extendable endpoint for casting votes. Alito drew direct parallels to how Americans observe other nationally recognized fixed holidays and observances to illustrate the point:

• We celebrate a specific Birthday (not a vague period “around your birthday”).
• We have Independence Day on July 4th exactly—not over several days or with a “grace period.”
• We observe George Washington Day (also known as Presidents’ Day or Washington’s Birthday) on the designated third Monday in February as a precise federal holiday.
• The same holds for Memorial Day, Labor Day, and other holidays, which are tied to exact dates or specified Mondays without ambiguity or extensions.

Alito: "We have lots of phrases that involve two words, the second of which is 'day.' Labor Day, Memorial Day, George Washington's birthday, Independence Day, birthday, and Election Day. They are all particular days. So if we start with that, if I have nothing more to look at… pic.twitter.com/DaBzSxjI7M

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 23, 2026

Alito’s full analogy drove home the challengers’ core argument: Just as these holidays are pinpointed to specific days with no leeway for extension (e.g., no one claims fireworks can be set off “around” July 4th over a week-long window), federal law demands that Election Day function as a hard, uniform deadline. Allowing states to receive and count ballots days later effectively extends or moves the “election” beyond Congress’s statutory intent, treating Election Day as flexible rather than final. This line of questioning by Justice Alito highlighted skepticism toward claims that mailing delays or voter convenience justify post-Election Day receipt, reinforcing the need for strict rules to ensure election certainty, prevent manipulation, and preserve public trust.

States That Currently Count Ballots Received After Election Day

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), 14 states plus the District of Columbia permit grace periods for regular domestic mail ballots received after Election Day if postmarked on or before Election Day (with variations for unclear postmarks or UOCAVA ballots). A total of 29 states extend this to military and overseas ballots. Judicial Watch has indicated that over 30 jurisdictions could be affected, including eight states that count certain late ballots even without a postmark. Four states (Ohio, Kansas, North Dakota, and Utah) have recently repealed their grace periods in anticipation of the ruling.

Key states with grace periods for regular mail ballots include:

• Washington: Up to 21 days after Election Day.
• California: Up to 7 days after Election Day (postmarked by Election Day).
• Nevada: Up to approximately 4 days after (postmarked by Election Day or unclear postmark handled until the third day after).
• Mississippi: Up to 5 days after (the law at issue).
• Alaska: Up to 10 days after.
• Texas: 1 day after.
• Others: Illinois, New Jersey, and states with shorter or conditional extensions.

How Many Ballots Were Counted After Election Day? (2024 Data)

In the 2024 general election, more than 750,000 ballots were received and counted after Election Day in grace-period jurisdictions. Notable figures include:

• Washington: Approximately 127,000 ballots (about 3% of total votes).
• California: Approximately 373,000 ballots (2.3% of total).
• Nevada: Approximately 11,900 ballots in its two largest counties (Clark County ~9,500; Washoe County ~2,400), under 1% but potentially decisive in close races. Nevada also processes ballots without clear postmarks up to post-Election Day cutoffs.
• Other states filled the remainder, with late ballots often prolonging certification or deciding tight contests.

Notable Controversies

Nevada’s grace period for late-arriving mail ballots drew intense national scrutiny following the 2022 U.S. Senate election. Democratic incumbent Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto narrowly defeated Republican challenger Adam Laxalt by just 7,928 votes (498,316 to 490,388), a margin of roughly 0.78%. The race remained uncalled for four days after Election Day. Laxalt initially led based on strong in-person and rural county voting. However, thousands of mail-in ballots received and counted in the days following Election Day—primarily from Democratic strongholds in Clark County—flipped the outcome to Cortez Masto, ultimately securing Democratic control of the U.S. Senate.

Republicans, including the Laxalt campaign, raised serious concerns about the process, pointing to potential ballot harvesting, questions over chain of custody for late-arriving ballots, aggressive signature curing, lax signature verification, and the broader issue of votes continuing to arrive and be tabulated well after polls closed.

In California, Democrat Adam Gray defeated Rep. John Duarte by 187 votes in a race where late mail in ballots flipped the race.

The closeness of the race, and California’s decision to continue counting votes that arrived up to 7 days past election day, caused the Republican National Committee (RNC) to file lawsuits against California. The 30 days extension that allows counting of curated and late votes also became a cause celebre, with even President elect Donald Trump weighing in on the issue. Many Republicans have also said that the 13th District, as well as the 45th district where Congresswoman Michelle Steel (R-CA) lost, had been decided not on the election day vote count, but through late and curated ballots that in most other states would be illegal to count.

“It is absurd for California to accept ballots by mail up to seven days after Election Day and take almost a month to count them,” said former RNC Chairman Michael Whatley. “The RNC, alongside the California Republican Party, will continue to fight aggressively to force all states to stop accepting ballots after Election Day.”

California’s and Nevada’s extended receipt and canvass periods have drawn repeated scrutiny for enabling late-arriving ballots, potential harvesting, and results shifting weeks after polls close.

The Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision will determine whether Congress’s uniform Election Day mandate overrides state extensions. Supporters argue it restores integrity and finality; critics warn of disenfranchising voters facing mailing issues. The outcome will govern rules for the 2026 midterms and elections ahead.