Listen to the article
Ohio Governor Signs Law Eliminating Mail-In Ballot Grace Period Despite Reservations
Ohio Governor Mike DeWine reluctantly signed legislation Friday eliminating the state’s four-day grace period for counting late-arriving mail-in ballots, citing concerns over potential legal chaos if he vetoed the measure.
The new law ends Ohio’s practice of counting absentee ballots that arrive after Election Day but are postmarked by that date, a policy that has been in place for years. With this change, Ohio joins the growing majority of states requiring mail ballots to arrive by Election Day to be counted.
“I believe that this four-day grace period is reasonable, and I think for many reasons it makes a lot of sense,” DeWine told reporters during the bill signing. “Therefore, I normally would veto a repeal of this four-day grace period. And, frankly, that’s what I wish I could do.”
The Republican governor explained his decision was influenced by a pending U.S. Supreme Court case from Mississippi that could potentially invalidate similar grace period laws nationwide. The high court is reviewing a ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found Mississippi’s law allowing post-Election Day ballot counting violated federal statutes.
“No one knows how the Supreme Court will rule,” DeWine said. “However, if the court in late June upholds the 5th Circuit case and Ohio’s grace period for counting late ballots is still in effect, the election situation in Ohio would be chaotic.”
DeWine warned that such a ruling would create conflicting rules for state and federal candidates on the same ballot, with insufficient time for state lawmakers to harmonize the requirements before the critical November elections.
With Ohio’s policy change, the number of states that accept mail ballots that arrive after Election Day has dropped to just 14, according to data from the National Conference of State Legislatures. Most states, including Ohio, maintain exceptions for certain eligible voters such as military personnel serving overseas and their families.
The bill represents a continuation of voting law changes in Ohio despite DeWine’s previous statements. In 2023, after signing a comprehensive package of election reforms, the term-limited governor had warned Republican lawmakers that he would likely veto further voting restrictions, stating that election integrity in Ohio had been sufficiently secured.
Democrats and voting rights advocates strongly opposed the legislation, arguing it creates unnecessary barriers to participation in the democratic process.
“The bill puts thousands of voters at risk of having their ballots not counted simply because of mail issues, and it could cancel registrations for many, including women who might have changed their last names or newly naturalized citizens,” Democratic state Representative Christine Cockley said in a statement. “Our efforts should be on making it easier for people to participate in our democracy, not harder.”
Critics point out that the bill also increases the frequency of voter registration purges and forces more voters to use provisional ballots, which require additional verification steps before being counted.
The continued modification of Ohio’s election procedures comes despite consistent evidence that the state’s electoral system functions with high accuracy. Post-election audits have repeatedly demonstrated that Ohio’s results are tallied with near perfection, including after the 2020 election, whose results former President Donald Trump continues to dispute despite no evidence of widespread fraud.
Conservative election groups celebrated the governor’s decision. Ken Cuccinelli, national chairman of the Election Transparency Initiative, praised the move in a statement: “By passing SB 293, Ohio lawmakers stood with the majority of states nationwide in affirming that Election Day should be treated as Election Day — a commonsense standard that strengthens trust in our elections.”
The change in Ohio’s election procedures will be in effect for the 2024 elections, which include highly competitive races for president, Senate, and Congress in this pivotal swing state.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


8 Comments
The elimination of the grace period for late mail-in ballots is concerning, as it could make it more difficult for some citizens to exercise their right to vote. I hope there are sufficient safeguards in place to protect voter access, especially for vulnerable populations.
The elimination of the grace period for late mail-in ballots is a significant change that could have far-reaching consequences. I hope there is ample opportunity for public discourse and input before this policy is finalized.
This is a complex issue with valid concerns on both sides. While upholding electoral integrity is crucial, I worry that this change could create unnecessary barriers for some voters. Careful consideration of the potential impacts is warranted.
Agreed. It’s important to strike the right balance between electoral integrity and voter access. Ongoing monitoring and adjustment of this policy may be necessary to ensure fairness.
This is a politically charged issue, and I can understand the governor’s dilemma. While upholding electoral integrity is important, I worry that this change could disproportionately impact certain voters. It will be crucial to closely examine the real-world effects.
Agreed. The potential legal implications are also concerning. Transparent and thorough analysis of the impacts will be essential going forward.
This is a complex issue with valid arguments on both sides. The governor’s concern over potential legal chaos is understandable, though the elimination of the grace period could disenfranchise some voters. It would be helpful to understand more about the reasoning behind this change and its potential impacts.
I agree, this is a delicate balance between electoral integrity and voter access. It will be important to monitor the effects of this policy change and ensure it does not unfairly disadvantage any group of voters.