在一项对中期选举有直接影响的裁决中，最高法院周一勉强支持密西西比州的一项法律，该法律允许对迟到的邮寄选票进行制表，只要这些选票在选举日之前盖有邮戳。
Amy Coney Barrett法官代表5-4多数党写道，联邦选举法规没有提到选票收据，但并没有超越各州制定自己的政策来处理邮件延误投票的能力。
“制宪者认识到制定适用于国家形势每一种可能变化的选举法的困难。因此，他们没有将选举法宪法化，而是决定需要在某个地方赋予选举自由裁量权。巴雷特写道:“我只想说，这个法庭没有这个权力。”。
这一决定是提起诉讼的共和党和特朗普政府的损失，特朗普政府通过对邮件投票实施严格的联邦限制，推动在全国范围内推翻州选举规则。
总统周一称最高法院的决定是“巨大的损失”，并再次呼吁国会通过拯救美国法案，这是他的签名选举和投票改革立法。
参议院多数党领袖约翰·图恩(John Thune)一再表示，该法案没有足够的共和党票数通过。
29个州目前接受一些及时投出但迟到的邮寄选票-有时在投票结束后几天-将能够继续提供宽限期。
在异议中，萨缪尔·阿利托大法官与克拉伦斯·托马斯大法官、尼尔·戈萨奇和布雷特·卡瓦诺一起写道，该决定无视联邦法律中规定的“选举日”的含义。
“今天的决定不仅不符合法规文本、法律背景、历史惯例和先例;它还可能产生可悲的后果，”阿利托写道。“大多数人的支持产生了一系列令人不安的选举法问题，并有可能进一步削弱美国人对选举诚信的信心。"
这一结果是密西西比州的胜利，密西西比州为其在投票结束后五天内接受选票的政策进行了辩护，投票权倡导者认为，几十年的法律先例支持各州拥有自己选举的主要权力。
然而，作为对该决定的回应，密西西比州州长、共和党人泰特·里夫斯(Tate Reeves)呼吁州议会修改最高法院支持的法律。
“仅仅因为法院裁定这种做法符合宪法，并不意味着我们应该允许它在我们的国家，”里夫斯在X周一的一篇帖子中说。“下一次会议，我呼吁密西西比州立法机关废除冠状病毒肺炎时代的法律，并要求秘书在选举日下午5点前收到邮寄的选票，以便进行统计。”
选举监督组织表示，严重依赖美国邮政服务的选民，如农村、海外和残疾选民，担心如果投递延迟，选票被拒绝的风险会更高。
根据美国选举援助委员会(EAC)的说法，迟到是全国邮件投票被拒绝的主要原因。
根据EAC的数据，在2024年选举期间，14个州投出了2800万张邮件选票，并有邮戳截止日期和宽限期。大约有725，000人因为迟到而没有被统计。
民主党全国委员会(Democratic National Committee)提交了一份案情摘要，对最高法院关于邮寄投票的决定表示庆祝，称“民主占了上风”。
“民主党全国委员会自豪地与密西西比州站在一起，挫败了RNC对美国人投票权的最新攻击，”民主党全国委员会主席肯·马丁周一在一份声明中写道。
最高法院的裁决是在特朗普积极推动加强联邦对邮寄投票的监督之际做出的。
特朗普于2026年3月签署的行政命令将要求各州向美国邮政局提交经批准的选民名单，美国邮政局将负责确保选票只交付给符合条件的居民。
上周，马萨诸塞州联邦地区法院法官英迪拉·塔尔瓦尼暂停订单在她的决定中写道，“宪法保留了仅由各州决定选民资格的权力。行政部门和国会都不得干涉这一权力。”
美国邮政管理局尚未实施拟议的政策变化以遵守特朗普的命令，但美国邮政总局的一名高级官员向国会证实，他的机构将会这样做拒绝递送选票除非各州交出选民名单。
“国会制定的任何法律都没有授权USPS控制邮寄投票。塔尔瓦尼的裁决称:“美国邮政总局目前发布的与投票相关的指南对各州没有约束力，只是推荐性的。”。
SCOTUS rebuffs GOP bid to block counting of late-arriving mail ballots
In a ruling with direct bearing on the midterm elections, the Supreme Court on Monday narrowly upheld a Mississippi law allowing tabulation of late-arriving mail-in ballots so long as they were postmarked by Election Day.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the 5-4 majority, wrote that federal election statutes -- which say nothing about ballot receipt -- do not override states' ability to set their own policies for handling tardy votes by mail.
"The Framers recognized the difficulty of crafting election laws applicable to every probable change in the situation of the country. 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," Barrett wrote.
The decision is a loss for the Republican Party, which brought the case, and the Trump administration, which has pushed to override state election rules nationwide by imposing strict federal limits on voting by mail.
The president on Monday called the Supreme Court’s decision a "tremendous loss" and again called on Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, his signature election and voting reforms legislation.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune has repeatedly said there aren't enough Republican votes for it to pass.
The 29 states that currently accept some timely cast but late-arriving mail-in ballots -- sometimes up to several days after polls have closed -- will be able to continue providing a grace period.
In dissent, Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, wrote that the decision flouts the meaning of "Election Day" as set forth in federal law.
"Not only is today's decision inconsistent with statutory text, legal context, historical practice, and precedent; it also threatens to produce lamentable consequences," Alito wrote. "The majority's holding spawns a slurry of troubling election-law questions and risks further undermining Americans' confidence in election integrity."
The outcome is a win for Mississippi, which had defended its policy of accepting ballots up to five days after voting had ended, and voting rights advocates who had argued that decades of legal precedent supported the primary authority of states to run their own elections.
However, in response to the decision, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves, a Republican, called on the state legislature to change the law upheld by the Supreme Court.
"Just because the Court ruled the practice constitutional doesn’t mean we should allow it in our state," Reeves said in a post on X Monday. "Next session, I call on the Mississippi Legislature to repeal the COVID-era law and require mail-in ballots to be received by the clerk by 5:00pm on Election Day in order to be counted."
Voters heavily reliant on the U.S. Postal Service, such as rural, overseas and disabled voters, had feared a higher risk of having ballots rejected if delivery is delayed, election watchdog groups said.
Lateness is the primary reason mail ballots are rejected nationwide, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
During the 2024 election, 28 million mail ballots were cast in the 14 states with postmark deadlines and grace periods, according to EAC. Roughly 725,000 were not counted because they were late.
The Democratic National Committee, which had filed a brief in the case, celebrated the Supreme Court's decision on mail ballots by saying "democracy prevailed."
"The DNC is proud to have stood with the State of Mississippi to defeat the RNC’s latest attack on Americans' voting rights," DNC chair Ken Martin wrote in statement on Monday.
The Supreme Court ruling comes as Trump has pushed aggressively to increase federal oversight of mail-in voting.
A Trump executive order signed in March 2026 would require states to submit approved voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service, which in turn would be tasked with ensuring ballots are only delivered to eligible residents.
Last week, Federal District Court Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusettsput the order on hold, writing in her decision, "The Constitution reserves the power to determine voter eligibility to the States alone. Neither the Executive Branch nor Congress may interfere with this power."
The Postal Service has not yet implemented a proposed policy change to comply with Trump's order, but a top USPS official confirmed to Congress that his agency wouldrefuse to deliver ballotsunless states turn over lists of voters.
"No law enacted by Congress delegates authority to control mail-in voting to USPS. The voting-related guidance currently issued by USPS is not binding on the States, merely recommended," Talwani’s ruling said.
