5 years of calling mail-in voting a fraud scheme later, Trump could get exactly what he’s been after

The Supreme Court could soon block state laws that allow mail-in ballots to be counted after Election Day, as long as they were postmarked by that date. The case is called Watson v. Republican National Committee, and a ruling against these laws could affect around 30 states that currently allow ballots to be counted after polls close.

President Donald Trump and Republicans have long argued that mail-in voting is open to fraud, though no evidence has ever supported that claim. Now, the Supreme Court may be about to hand them one of their biggest wins on this issue.

According to Mediaite, the six conservative justices appeared deeply skeptical of Mississippi’s law during oral arguments. Under the current law, mail-in ballots for federal elections can be counted up to five business days after Election Day. Their questions strongly suggested they believe the federal definition of “Election Day” should override state rules on this matter.

Conservative justices appear ready to strike down late ballot counting laws

Justice Samuel Alito raised concerns about what he called “election month” rather than a single “Election Day,” pointing out that other phrases using the word “day,” like Labor Day or Independence Day, refer to specific dates. “If we have nothing more to look at than the phrase ‘Election Day,’ I think this is the day in which everything is going to take place, or almost everything,” he said.

Alito also echoed the Trump administration’s position, saying that confidence in election results can be “seriously undermined if the apparent outcome of the election on the day after the polls close is radically flipped by the acceptance later of a big stash of ballots that flip the election.” This comes at a time when Trump has faced pressure on other political fronts as well.

The three liberal justices pushed back, raising concerns about the long-standing authority states have over their own election laws. They also pointed to groups that depend heavily on mail-in voting, such as overseas military members and their families, as well as voters in remote and rural areas.

An AP report highlighted Alaskan towns where residents receive mail only on weekday flights, and some of these areas do not even offer in-person voting options. For communities like these, mail-in voting is not just a convenience; it is their only way to vote.

Mississippi’s lawyers warned that overturning the law would “require scrapping election laws in most states,” leading to “destabilizing nationwide ramifications” just months before a federal election. Justice Clarence Thomas challenged their argument by asking, “So when do I know whether or not a choice is final?” Meanwhile, Trump and Musk’s complicated political alliance continues to shape the broader Republican agenda heading into the election season.

Early voting also came up as a potential problem for the Court’s reasoning. Even some conservative justices were not fully satisfied with the distinction the RNC and Trump administration drew between early voting and late ballot receipt. 

Justice Amy Coney Barrett challenged RNC lawyer Paul Clement after he said counting ballots after Election Day would have been “unthinkable” in 1845. “Isn’t that true of early voting, too? Why is that permissible? If we’re just going to say historically it just needs to look like it always looked, how come those features fall out?” she asked. A decision is expected in late June, just before the heart of election season begins.