JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — A federal court said Mississippi cannot count mail-in ballots that arrive shortly after Election Day, however the decision was not expected to affect the Nov. 5 election.
Although the appellate judges firmly asserted that counting late ballots violates federal law, even if those ballots are postmarked by Election Day, the judges stopped short of an order immediately blocking Mississippi from continuing the practice. Their ruling noted federal court precedents have discouraged court actions that change established procedures shortly before an election.
The outcome may be negligible in most elections in Mississippi, but the case could affect voting in swing states if the Supreme Court ultimately issues a ruling.
The three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a July decision by U.S. District Judge Louis Guirola Jr., who had dismissed challenges to Mississippi’s election law by the Republican National Committee, the Libertarian Party of Mississippi and others. The appeals court order sent the case back to Guirola for further action.
The appeals court said its ruling Friday would not be returned to a lower court until seven days after the deadline for appealing their decision has passed — which is usually at least 14 days. That would put the effect of the ruling well past Nov. 5.
Republicans filed more than 100 lawsuits challenging various aspects of vote-casting after being chastised repeatedly by judges in 2020 for bringing complaints about how the election was run only after votes were tallied.
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley praised the ruling for upholding “commonsense ballot safeguards” and said voters deserve “a transparent election which ends on November 5th.”
A spokesperson for the Democratic National Committee did not immediately comment on the ruling.
Mississippi is one of several states with laws allowing mailed ballots to be counted if they are postmarked by Election Day, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The list includes swing states such as Nevada and states such as Colorado, Oregon and Utah that rely heavily on mail voting.
In July, a federal judge dismissed a similar lawsuit in Nevada. The Republican National Committee is asking the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to revive that case.
Guirola wrote that Mississippi’s law does not conflict with federal election laws. The suit challenging the Mississippi law argued that the state improperly extends the federal election and that, as a result, “timely, valid ballots are diluted by untimely, invalid ballots.”
Guirola disagreed, writing in July that “no ‘final selection’ is made after the federal election day under Mississippi’s law. All that occurs after election day is the delivery and counting of ballots cast on or before election day.”
Although the Mississippi challenge was led by Republicans and Libertarians, there is bipartisan support for the Mississippi practice. Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch is defending the state’s top election official. Secretary of State Michael Watson a defendant in the case. Both are Republicans.
Watson said in a statement Friday that his office will “explore all available legal options.”
WHAT DOES IT MEAN
A recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit could have significant implications for how states handle mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day. The court reviewed a Mississippi law that allows ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted as long as they arrive within five days. The Republican National Committee (RNC) challenged the policy, arguing that federal law requires ballots to be received by Election Day, and allowing any grace period violates this standard.
The outcome of this case could set a precedent, especially since many states, including swing states like Nevada, have similar policies. If the court sides with the RNC, states under the Fifth Circuit’s jurisdiction (Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas) may need to halt the counting of late-arriving ballots. Depending on appeals, the case could also move to the U.S. Supreme Court, potentially affecting voting rules nationwide.
This legal challenge reflects a broader debate about balancing voting access with procedural deadlines. While supporters argue strict deadlines ensure election integrity, opponents warn that eliminating grace periods could disenfranchise voters, especially in rural or underserved areas that rely heavily on mail-in voting due to logistical challenges or postal delays