Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Voting prep, part 3: Voting by mail

vote by mail
Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The Fulcrum is publishing a series of articles to help people navigate the shifting laws that govern elections. This, the third article, covers the deadlines for voting by mail.

Two years ago, with the Covid-19 pandemic raging across the country, 43 percent of voters cast their ballots by mail – a massive increase over prior elections.

Now that people have a taste for it, and with more states either switching to all mail elections or loosening the restrictions on absentee ballots, we can expect to see a large percentage choose that option this year.

But voters who do opt to vote by mail need to be aware of not one but two deadlines: first, to apply for a mail-in ballot and, second, when to submit the ballot in order for it to be counted. We’ve done the work for you.


While “absentee” and “mailed” ballots are often lumped into the same category of voting, as they both use the postal system, there are some differences. Absentee ballots may require a more formal application in which the voters need to specify the reasoning for using such a ballot (such as being away from home for college, work or military service, or due to health concerns or disabilities). Vote-by-mail may have only referred to the states that generally do not have in-person voting.

However, since the outbreak of the pandemic, mailed ballots have become a much more popular choice to cast a ballot and have become synonymous with absentee ballots. And a number of states that required a reason to use an absentee ballot have become “no excuse” states, allowing anyone to request such a ballot.

Made with Flourish

If you live in one of the eight states that proactively send all voters a mail-in ballot (California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington), you do not need to worry about the application deadline – unless you have updated your address. Utah, for example, required such notices to be filed 11 days before the election.

Similarly, California, Colorado, Hawaii and Oregon require updates to mailing locations to be submitted five to eight days out.

Mississippi, New Hampshire, and North Dakota do not have a specific deadline for which an absentee ballot application needs to be received; however, Vote.org recommends requesting the ballot seven days before Election Day.

Seven states — Wyoming, Delaware, Vermont, South Dakota, Montana, Minnesota, and Connecticut — have received-by deadlines of one day before Election Day for absentee applications or updates, the most forgiving out of all the states. Once again, Vote.org recommends applying for an absentee ballot at least seven days before the election.

Every other state has mailed ballot application deadlines spanning between a month before Election Day to three days before people hit the in-person polls. Check with your state for specific deadlines.

Additional reading:

Once voters have submitted their absentee ballot applications, they then must focus on the deadline for returning the ballot to election officials. Many states — such as Rhode Island, New Mexico, Nebraska and Kentucky — require mail-in ballots to be received by sometime on Election Day.

Others like Florida, Alabama and Minnesota have different same-day deadlines for mailing absentee ballots rather than delivering them by hand. Depending on the state, voters will have an earlier receive-by time for in-person delivered ballots compared to mailed ballots, or the reverse.

North Dakota, Ohio and Alaska, among others, choose to emphasize the postmarked date and will honor the ballot when received by a specified date after Election Day. For example, California requires mailed ballots to be postmarked by Election Day and received no later than seven days after the election. New Jersey requires postmarked ballots to be received 144 hours after polls close.

No two states have the same procedure so it is always important to double check with your state to be informed of with their voting system.

The Voting Rights Lab has created a resource for tracking changes to vote-by-mail policies in each state.


Read More

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Close-up of sign reading 'Immigrants Make America Great' at a Baltimore rally.

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Donald Trump’s second administration has fully clarified Latinos’ racial position in America: our ethnic group’s labor, culture, and aspirations are too much for his supporters to stomach. The Latino presence in America triggers too many uneasy questions (are they White?), too many doubts (are they really American?), and too much resentment (why are they doing better than me?).

Trump’s targeted deportations of undocumented Latinos, unwarranted arrests of Latino citizens, and heightened ICE presence in Latino neighborhoods address these worries by lumping Latinos with Black people. Simply put, we have become yet another visible population that America socially stigmatizes, economically exploits, and politically terrorizes because aggrieved White adults want to preserve their rank as our nation’s premier racial group. The cumulative impacts are serious: just yesterday, an international panel of investigators on human rights and racism, backed by the U.N., found that such actions have resulted in “grave human rights violations.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less