Federal Court Decision Ignites Nationwide Controversy Over Mail-In Ballots

Absentee ballot envelopes with pen on table.

A federal court ruling on Mississippi’s mail-in ballot law has ignited a nationwide debate over the uniformity of U.S. election laws and federal compliance.

At a Glance

  • Federal court declares Mississippi’s post-election day mail-in ballot law unlawful under federal statutes.
  • The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals emphasizes Congress’s designation of a singular voting day.
  • The ruling maintains current conditions, not enjoining Mississippi’s law immediately before an election.
  • This decision may influence similar mail-in ballot laws in numerous states, including battlegrounds.

Federal Scrutiny and Legal Reversal

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a previous district court decision that favored Mississippi’s mail-in ballot deadline extension. This reversal followed a lawsuit initiated by the Republican National Committee. Mississippi had extended the receipt deadline to five days post-Election Day during the COVID-19 pandemic and continued the policy thereafter. The court’s decision states that only one day is designated for federal elections by Congress, rendering Mississippi’s extension illegal under federal law.

Judges Andrew S. Oldham, James C. Ho, and Kyle Duncan, all appointed by Donald Trump, presided over the case. They collectively emphasized adherence to federal election timing, stressing that “Federal law requires voters to take timely steps to vote by Election Day.” This legal stance may prompt states where similar extensions exist to reevaluate their election timelines.

Wider Implications for U.S. Election Law

Beyond Mississippi, the court’s ruling might have repercussions on voting laws in over 18 states and territories allowing post-election receipt of mail-in ballots. Although Mississippi is not a competitive electoral state, battleground states like Nevada and Ohio maintain similar ballot receipt extensions. Further, Maryland’s law allows counting mail-in ballots up to 10 days post-election if postmarked timely. These practices could face further challenges based on the court’s interpretation of federal election mandates.

“Even if the ballots have not been counted, the result is fixed when all of the ballots are received and the proverbial ballot box is closed. The selections are done and final. By contrast, while election officials are still receiving ballots, the election is ongoing: The result is not yet fixed, because live ballots are still being received,” the opinion reads.

The court declined to issue an injunction against Mississippi’s law before the election, preserving existing electoral operations. The court cited the importance of “the value of preserving the status quo in a voting case on the eve of an election.” This stance maintains the current method, allowing states time to consider statutory adjustments.

The Future of Mail-In Voting Policies

As states and their electorates navigate these legal waters, the ruling could serve as a catalyst for reassessing mail-in voting policies. States like Mississippi, which held onto its pandemic-era voting extension, might revisit their electoral regulations to align with federal statute perceptions. This dialogue reflects broader ongoing debates surrounding voter accessibility, election integrity, and legislative coherence nationwide.