Federal Election-Day Statutes Supreme Court Case (Watson v. Republican National Committee)
The case of *Watson v. Republican National Committee* originated from a lawsuit filed by the Republican National Committee and others in January 2024, challenging a Mississippi law that allows absentee ballots to be counted if received up to five business days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked by Election Day. The plaintiffs argue that federal election-day statutes preempt this state law, asserting that ballots must be both cast and received by Election Day. The case has proceeded through the lower courts, with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that federal law preempts Mississippi's grace period. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and is scheduled to hear arguments in the case during its October 2025-2026 term. The current status is that the Supreme Court has extended the deadline for filing the joint appendix and petitioner's brief to January 2, 2026, and respondents' briefs to February 9, 2026.
Timeline
Want updates on this thread?
Track this story2026
16 updates
2026
16 updatesRepresentative Eric Burlison is leading an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in the case of Watson v. Republican National Committee. The brief urges the court to uphold federal law mandating a single, uniform day for federal elections. The case specifically addresses Mississippi's law that permits counting absentee ballots received after Election Day if they were postmarked by Election Day.
The U.S. Supreme Court announced it will hear oral arguments for the Watson v. Republican National Committee case on Monday, March 23, 2026. This case challenges whether federal law mandates ballots must be received by Election Day.
Appellate litigators from Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner (BCLP) filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case of Watson v. Republican National Committee on behalf of National Security Leaders for America (NSL4A).
via bclplaw.com
The League of Women Voters of Mississippi (LWVMS) filed an amicus brief defending a state law that permits counting mail ballots received up to five days after Election Day if they were mailed by Election Day. This brief supports the respondent's position in the *Watson v. Republican National Committee* case.
via lwv.org
A ruling in the Supreme Court case could invalidate similar ballot grace periods in 30 other states. U.S. Senators Alex Padilla and Ron Wyden led a group in filing an amicus brief, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals previously reversed a lower court's decision in the case.
via brennancenter.org·padilla.senate.gov·theusconstitution.org
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that candidates have standing to sue over election laws they believe to be unconstitutional before voting takes place. The justices are slated to hear *Watson v. Republican National Committee*.
The Brennan Center and co-counsel filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to protect state laws that allow counting ballots sent by Election Day but arriving shortly after, emphasizing the impact on military and overseas voters.
via ballotpedia.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·brennancenter.org·scotusblog.com
Three Native American organizations filed an amicus brief in the Watson v. Republican National Committee case, addressing state deadlines for ballots received after Election Day.
via narf.org
The Public Rights Project filed an amicus brief on January 9, 2026, on behalf of 16 local election officials and governments, urging the Supreme Court to uphold absentee ballot grace periods.
Protect Democracy and the Campaign Legal Center have filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case Watson v. Republican National Committee, arguing that Mississippi has the right to set its own deadlines for receiving ballots.
A bipartisan coalition of local election officials filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold absentee ballot grace periods, arguing that the Fifth Circuit's ruling would cause chaos in election administration.
The Constitutional Accountability Center filed an amicus brief in the *Watson v. Republican National Committee* case on January 9, 2026. The brief addresses the challenge to a Mississippi law allowing absentee ballots to be counted if received after Election Day.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) filed an amicus brief in the *Watson v. Republican National Committee* case, warning that a ruling for the RNC could disenfranchise voters due to mail delays and impact military and overseas voters.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case *Watson v. Republican National Committee*. The ACLU argues against the Republican National Committee's interpretation of federal election laws, which they believe would disenfranchise voters.
via aclu.org
Amicus briefs were filed by various individuals and organizations, including over 50 former military leaders and diplomats, urging the Supreme Court to protect state laws that allow counting ballots that are sent by and arrive shortly after Election Day.
via scotusblog.com·brennancenter.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·ballotpedia.org
Petitioner Michael Watson filed his brief with the Supreme Court.
via scotusblog.com·brennancenter.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·ballotpedia.org
2025
3 updates
2025
3 updatesThe Supreme Court granted certiorari, agreeing to hear the case during its October 2025-2026 term.
via ballotpedia.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·brennancenter.org·scotusblog.com
Mississippi Secretary of State Michael Watson appealed the Fifth Circuit's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
via ballotpedia.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·brennancenter.org·scotusblog.com
The Fifth Circuit declined a motion from Mississippi to rehear the case en banc before the court's full membership.
via ballotpedia.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·brennancenter.org·scotusblog.com
2024
3 updates
2024
3 updatesThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's decision, holding that federal election-day statutes preempt Mississippi's law and require ballots for federal office to be both cast and received by Election Day.
via ballotpedia.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·brennancenter.org·scotusblog.com
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi granted summary judgment in favor of the state officials, ruling that the Mississippi law allowing a grace period for absentee ballots did not conflict with federal statutes.
via ballotpedia.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·brennancenter.org·scotusblog.com
The Libertarian Party of Mississippi filed a similar companion case, which was later consolidated with the RNC's lawsuit.
via scotusblog.com·brennancenter.org·en.wikipedia.org·oyez.org·ballotpedia.org
Story began · 2 years, 2 mo ago