The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 29 in a 5-4 decision that states may continue to count mail-in ballots cast by Election Day that arrive afterward, upholding laws like those in Illinois and Mississippi. The ruling, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, clarified that while federal law sets the date by which votes must be cast, it does not require ballots to be received by Election Day.

The case originated from a challenge led by the Republican National Committee and other conservative groups seeking to invalidate Mississippi's law, which allows mail ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received within five days afterward. The challengers argued that federal statutes mandate ballots be received by Election Day to preserve election integrity, while supporters of the law asserted that the election occurs when voters make their choice, not when ballots are tallied.

Justice Barrett’s majority opinion stated that “the electorate’s choice is made when voting is complete, not when ballots are received.” She emphasized that the court was addressing a narrow legal question without broadening its scope to other aspects of absentee voting or the balance of power between Congress and states in regulating elections. Joining Barrett were Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s three liberal justices. In dissent, Justice Samuel Alito contended that allowing late-arriving ballots effectively postpones the official election date and risks undermining election integrity.

The ruling affects at least 14 states that have grace periods for counting mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day but arriving within several days afterward, as well as additional states with similar provisions for military and overseas voters. Illinois allows ballots postmarked or attested by Election Day to be accepted up to two weeks later, while other states, including Washington, California, and New York, have shorter grace periods ranging from three to seven days. Thirty-six states require mail ballots to be received by Election Day to count.

Proponents of the ruling and mail-in voting highlight its importance for enabling participation among various voter groups, including retirees, military personnel, and residents in remote areas. Alaska Native and Native American advocates, for example, emphasized that geographic and postal service challenges make grace periods essential for ensuring votes are counted. Voting rights organizations praised the decision, with NAACP President Derrick Johnson calling it a "win for our democracy.” Common Cause urged Congress to enact nationwide voter protections.

Opponents, including former President Donald Trump, criticized the ruling as a setback for election security and reiterated concerns about potential fraud, despite studies showing such instances are rare. Trump, who had voted by mail in prior elections, labeled the decision a “tremendous loss” and pressed Congress to pass legislation, including the proposed SAVE America Act, aimed at tightening mail voting regulations and requiring voter identification. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about the legislation’s prospects.

State officials echoed differing views. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker praised the ruling as supportive of free and fair elections, while some critics called for tighter mail-in ballot deadlines to reduce delays that can fuel mistrust. Election administrators noted the ruling avoids near-term disruptions in election law ahead of the November midterm elections, though ongoing debates persist about balancing voter accessibility with public confidence in electoral outcomes.