120 F.4th 200
5th Cir.2024Background
- The Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and others challenged Mississippi’s law allowing absentee ballots to be received up to five days after federal Election Day.
- Plaintiffs argued that federal law requires all ballots for federal offices to be received by Election Day, preempting Mississippi’s more permissive deadline.
- The district court granted summary judgment to Mississippi, upholding the post-Election Day ballot deadline.
- Plaintiffs appealed to the Fifth Circuit, asserting both statutory preemption and constitutional claims under § 1983.
- The Fifth Circuit reversed, holding that federal law establishes a uniform, singular Election Day by which all ballots must be received.
- The case was remanded for the district court to determine appropriate remedies and to reconsider associated constitutional claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does federal law require ballot receipt by Election Day? | Federal statutes set a uniform Election Day, preempting state laws allowing later ballot receipt | Ballots are "cast" when mailed; law does not mandate Election Day receipt | Federal law preempts; all ballots must be received by Election Day |
| Do later deadlines for absentee ballots violate voters' and candidates' rights under the Constitution? | Yes; later deadlines undermine rights to vote and stand for office | No; state is regulating elections within permissible bounds | Not addressed on the merits—vacated for reconsideration |
| Are there federal statutes that permit post-Election Day ballot receipt? | No; statutes requiring uniform election day disallow late ballot receipt | Yes; statutes like UOCAVA and HAVA create exceptions | Congressional silence or exceptions do not abrogate uniform Election Day |
| Does the “mailbox rule” apply to absentee ballots? | No; ballot is not "cast" until received by officials | Yes; voting is complete upon mailing ballot | Mailbox rule inapplicable; casting requires receipt by officials |
Key Cases Cited
- Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67 (Supreme Court held that federal law requires a uniform day for election of federal officeholders, preempting inconsistent state law)
- Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc., 570 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court addressed Congress's power under the Elections Clause to preempt state election regulations)
- Ex Parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371 (Supreme Court affirmed the paramount authority of Congress to regulate federal elections)
- Newberry v. United States, 256 U.S. 232 (Supreme Court clarified the definition of "election" as the final selection by the electorate)
- Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (permitted post-Election Day counting of ballots but not their receipt)
- Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191 (discussed historical voting practices relevant to the timing of ballot receipt)
- Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428 (upheld states’ authority to set reasonable election regulations)