The United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Monday morning that ballots received up to five days after an election may be counted so long as they were postmarked on time.
This decision marks a loss for Republicans who challenged the policy ahead of the upcoming midterm elections.
According to the majority opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, federal election-day laws do not prevent states from adopting this type of so-called “grace period” policy.
Signing onto this opinion were Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Originating in Mississippi, the case asked the Justices to decide whether mail-in ballots can be counted after election day if they are postmarked by the correct date.
More than a dozen other states have similar laws on the books allowing for these ballots to be counted, so there were many eyes on this case ahead of Monday’s ruling.
The law at the center of this case was first passed in 2020 in Mississippi as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
A challenge to the policy was brought four years later by a coalition consisting of the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, a Mississippi voter, and a county election official.
The Libertarian Party of Mississippi also pushed back against the law in a separate suit that was later consolidated into this case.
The plaintiffs alleged in their lawsuit that the policy is in violation of a federal law, enacted by Congress in 1845, declaring the Tuesday after the first Monday in November as “election day.”
[RELATED: SCOTUS Considers Legality of Accepting Ballots After Election Day]
“[T]he election-day statutes require the electorate’s choice to be made on election day. That occurs so long as election day is the deadline for individuals to vote—as it is in Mississippi,” Justice Barrett wrote.
“But the election-day statutes do not set a deadline for ballot receipt,” she explained, “so they do not prevent Mississippi from counting ballots postmarked before election day yet received afterward.”
“The Framers recognized the difficulty of crafting election laws ‘applicable to every probable change in the situation of the country,'” the majority opinion concluded. “So instead of constitutionalizing election law, they decided that ‘a discretionary power over elections’ needed to be lodged ‘somewhere.’ Suffice it to say, that power was not lodged in this Court.”
The dissenting opinion was authored by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, as well as in part by Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
“Not only is today’s decision inconsistent with statutory text, legal context, historical practice, and precedent; it also threatens to produce lamentable consequences,” Justice Alito wrote. “The majority’s holding spawns a slurry of troubling election-law questions and risks further undermining Americans’ confidence in election integrity.”
This case will now be remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s decision.
They are technically, right, the postmark date is supposed to count.
But try telling that to your credit card company….
This all leaves elections open to more manipulation and only verifies that an American citizens voting power has been all but eliminated. Proper oversight is no longer allowed in all problem states. Some have resolved their issues and some never will without a hostile takeover. Easily distracted and ignorant of those who create these problems, Americans are not looking at a vibrant future if they continue to allow themselves to be sucked dry by their isreali masters. The United States of Goyim.