Illustration of the Supreme Court building and mail ballots for a news article on the mail ballot grace period ruling.
Illustration of the Supreme Court building and mail ballots for a news article on the mail ballot grace period ruling.
Изображение, созданное ИИ

Supreme Court upholds mail ballot grace periods in 5-4 ruling

Изображение, созданное ИИ

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld a Mississippi law allowing election officials to count mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day but received up to five days later. The 5-4 decision rejected a challenge by the Republican National Committee. It preserves practices used in about 18 states and territories.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's three liberal justices. She wrote that federal election-day statutes require voters to make their choice on Election Day but do not set a deadline for ballot receipt. "The election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose," Barrett stated.

Justice Samuel Alito dissented, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh in part. Alito warned that the ruling "creates a serious risk of further undermining public confidence in our elections." He argued it opens opportunities for fraud.

President Donald Trump called the decision a "tremendous loss" on Truth Social and renewed his push for the SAVE America Act. RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said the ruling makes it "more imperative that Congress pass the SAVE America Act." Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves urged his state legislature to repeal the law.

Что говорят люди

Initial reactions on X to the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling upholding Mississippi’s mail ballot grace period were mixed. Progressive voices and voting rights advocates celebrated it as a win protecting access and rejecting Republican challenges, while conservative users criticized it as harming election integrity and called for stricter laws like the SAVE Act. High-engagement posts from journalists and activists focused on the decision’s implications for 2026 midterms and state practices.

Связанные статьи

Illustration of U.S. Supreme Court ruling against Louisiana's majority-minority congressional map as unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
Изображение, созданное ИИ

Supreme Court strikes down Louisiana's majority-minority congressional map

Сообщено ИИ Изображение, созданное ИИ

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on April 29 that Louisiana's congressional map, which included a second majority-Black district, constitutes an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act requires proof of intentional discrimination, not just disparate impact. The decision, in Louisiana v. Callais, limits race-based redistricting and prompts new maps in several states.

A federal judge in Boston has blocked key parts of President Trump's executive order aimed at restricting mail-in voting. The ruling prevents the U.S. Postal Service from implementing proposed limits tied to state voter lists.

Сообщено ИИ

The U.S. Supreme Court issued an order on Monday allowing its April 29 decision in Louisiana v. Callais to take immediate effect, bypassing the usual 32-day waiting period. This enables Louisiana to cancel its congressional primaries and redraw maps before the 2026 midterms. The move sparked a sharp exchange between Justice Samuel Alito's concurrence and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissent.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6–3 on April 29, 2026, in Louisiana v. Callais that Louisiana’s congressional map (SB8) was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, concluding the Voting Rights Act did not require the state to draw an additional majority-Black district. Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., called the ruling “a massive and devastating blow,” warning it could accelerate redistricting fights across Southern states ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Сообщено ИИ

The U.S. Supreme Court last week issued a ruling in Louisiana v. Callais that dismantled key elements of the Voting Rights Act. The decision has prompted swift redistricting efforts in multiple states. Revelations about the lead plaintiff have also surfaced.

The Supreme Court is set to issue rulings in nearly two dozen cases over the next few weeks, including several high-stakes matters involving immigration and presidential authority.

Сообщено ИИ

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a series of recent orders allowing Louisiana and Alabama to redraw congressional maps that eliminate Black opportunity districts. The rulings came in the Louisiana v. Callais case and related Alabama litigation. They mark a sharp shift in the court's approach to voting rights enforcement under the Voting Rights Act.

Этот сайт использует куки

Мы используем куки для анализа, чтобы улучшить наш сайт. Прочитайте нашу политику конфиденциальности для дополнительной информации.
Отклонить