Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Voting rights groups hail SCOTUS decision on ballot grace period

News

Voting rights groups hail SCOTUS decision on ballot grace period

California sends mail-in ballots to all registered voters unless they opt out.

(Adobe Stock)

Voting rights experts are praising a U.S. Supreme Court decision Monday, which upheld a state’s right to set a grace period for counting mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day, as long as they were postmarked on time.

The challengers to Mississippi’s grace period argued accepting ballots after Election Day threatens election integrity. Supporters of the decision said the U.S. Constitution delegates election administration to the states.


Bernadette Reyes, senior staff attorney for the UCLA Voting Rights Project, said the decision means California can continue its current practice of counting ballots arriving within seven days.

“What they're saying is you cast your vote when you fill out your ballot, and as long as they're postmarked by Election Day, that means that they fulfilled their duty under the Constitution,” Reyes explained.

About 30 states currently offer some sort of grace period for ballots to arrive. President Donald Trump signed an executive order requiring states to turn over their voter lists to the federal government. The order instructed the U.S. Postal Service not to process mail-in ballots for people in states refusing to comply. Last week, a judge put the order on hold. Reyes pointed out mail-in ballots are especially useful for Americans living overseas or people with disabilities making it difficult to vote in person.

“Having that big interference with this really important and accessible method of voting would do tremendous damage for voter turnout,” she observed.

President Trump called the decision a “tremendous loss” and urged Congress to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, which would restrict voting in the name of fighting election fraud.

Voting rights groups hail SCOTUS decision on ballot grace period. The decision was first published by Public News Service and republished with permission.

Suzanne Potter is a Producer with PNS.


Read More

The New Fight Over Election Observation
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

The New Fight Over Election Observation

As a member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the U.S. has signed the foundational agreement committing all participating states to open elections to external scrutiny and inviting fellow members to observe through the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). The 2024 ODIHR observation mission to the U.S. found the fundamentals reassuring—a well-run process, active engagement, free campaigning—but issued 31 recommendations to align U.S. elections with international standards and commitments. Four stand out: federal pre-clearance legislation against discriminatory election-law changes; reassessing the Electoral College; balanced representation in election administration; and guaranteed access for international and nonpartisan observers—notable, since 17 states still legally bar international observation, which is at odds with commitments made by all 57 OSCE states. Yet over a year later, follow-through is thin: no pre-clearance restoration, no Electoral College review, unchanged observer-access laws. Where movement exists—in disinformation tools, in financial disclosure—it remains piecemeal.

An uncomfortable convergence

Keep ReadingShow less
Aspirations for the American Experiment Versus the Save Act of 2026
a person is casting a vote into a box

Aspirations for the American Experiment Versus the Save Act of 2026

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act stands as the direct antithesis of our founders' aspirations for the American Experiment, eroding the core principles of popular sovereignty and individual liberty. Rather than cultivating a government that derives its "just powers from the consent of the governed," this legislative measure inverts that relationship. It transforms a natural right into a government-administered privilege, erecting bureaucratic barriers that conflict with the expansive, participatory democratic republic the Framers sought to construct.

Subverting the Consent of the Governed: the foundational premise of the American Experiment, as articulated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, is that the legitimacy of a government hinges entirely on the active consent of its citizens. The SAVE Act disrupts this dynamic by fundamentally shifting the burden of proof.

Keep ReadingShow less
10 Organizations Independent Voters Need to Watch

Young woman at voting booth

Canva

10 Organizations Independent Voters Need to Watch

Independent voters are no longer a political afterthought. They are the majority.

And when these voters look at the state of politics in the US, they see the lack of accountability, representation, competition, and meaningful choice that the system produces.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Gerrymandering Solution
person holding white and red box

The Gerrymandering Solution

The 250th anniversary of American independence should remind us what’s wrong with gerrymandering. Due to partisanship, however, it now not only persists but rachets tighter in a tit-for-tat cycle that threatens to strangle representative rule. There is a solution to gerrymandering, however, if only politicians will act.

Inspired by revolutionary Enlightenment Era ideals, the Declaration of Independence and the new state constitutions of 1776 call for representative rule. The people would be sovereign, they proclaimed, with governments drawing their just powers from the consent of the governed. Nothing of the sort had ever been tried on a large scale and the founders struggled with how to implement it. Everything turned on establishing a truly representative governing assembly for each newly independent colony or state.

Keep ReadingShow less