184
submitted 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states can count ballots that arrive after Election Day, a persistent target of President Donald Trump.

The decision rejected a Republican-led attack on laws in more than half the states and the District of Columbia that permit mailed ballots to arrive and be counted some number of days after the election, provided they are postmarked by Election Day. The outcome spares officials the headache of changing their ballot rules just a few months before the 2026 midterm congressional elections.

In just over half those states, the more forgiving deadlines apply only to ballots cast by military and overseas voters.

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 40 points 13 hours ago

CAN, not MUST.

This means sane states will count them, Nazi states will throw them in the garbage.

Handle your business accordingly.

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world 29 points 13 hours ago

States run their own elections, as has always been the case, and as it should always be. They also must be postmarked by election day.

[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 9 points 13 hours ago

So why was there a Supreme Court ruling on this if the fed has nothing to do with states elections?

If today the Supreme Court had alternately said states must NOT accept ballots postmarked by election day but received later, that would have affected the way states handle their elections, right? Or am I missing something?

[-] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 19 points 13 hours ago

You aren't missing anything. Republicans sued and lost, then appealed their obvious loss up through the courts until it hit the SC. The SC ruled that the Constitution is clear that states run their elections. If they had ruled the other way, the chaos would have been... interesting.

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world 18 points 13 hours ago

Because that's how the court system works. Somebody (in this case the RNC) sued and it was appealed up to higher court levels. Because this is a Constitutional issue as election management is explicitly given to the states in the Constitution, SCOTUS took it up and made a ruling.

And yes if they had ruled the other way it would have affected elections, although it would have affected all states equally. At the end of the day the deadline is arbitrary anyway, we just have to pick what it is.

[-] Sprocketfree@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago

The obvious ruling would have been to deny the case in the first place...

[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Thank you and appreciate you clarifying

[-] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 6 points 13 hours ago

The case exists because Trump tried pushing a blatantly unconstitutional rule through.

[-] cattywampas@lemmy.world 11 points 14 hours ago

States' rights, baby.

this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2026
184 points (100.0% liked)

News

38164 readers
1569 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS