Some state officials say shifting mail ballot deadline will complicate plans for November elections

Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar found himself immediately texting his staff after leaving the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, where justices had just heard arguments that could fundamentally change how mail ballots are counted across America. His message was urgent: prepare contingency plans for November’s elections if the high court alters the rules when it issues its decision in June.

“The challenge is educating voters shortly before the election how the election is going to work,” Aguilar, a Democrat, explained. “That doesn’t happen overnight. The election planning happens long before.”

The case before the Supreme Court involves a challenge to Mississippi’s law allowing mail ballots to be counted if they’re postmarked by Election Day but arrive up to five days later. The Republican National Committee and Libertarian Party brought the lawsuit seeking to eliminate such grace periods.

Election officials in Nevada and 13 other states that permit counting ballots arriving after Election Day watched the proceedings with particular concern. An additional 15 states have similar grace periods specifically for military and overseas voters.

During nearly two hours of arguments, conservative justices, who hold a 6-3 majority on the court, appeared skeptical of these grace periods. When Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked RNC attorney Paul Clement whether a June ruling would violate the court’s “Purcell principle” — which discourages changing election rules close to voting — Clement assured him that June “would give them plenty of time.”

Election administrators strongly disagree with that assessment.

“Nobody has put in their budget to reprint all of their educational material for the midterms,” said Tammy Patrick, chief programs officer at the National Association of Elections Officials’ Election Center and a former Arizona election official. Most election offices have already printed flyers, signs, and ballot envelopes containing current deadlines for November’s election.

While late-arriving ballots represent a small fraction of total votes, they can be significant in close races. In Nevada, about 98% of mail ballots arrive before Election Day, with 95% of the remainder arriving the next day. In Illinois, approximately 106,000 ballots — just under 2% of 5.5 million votes cast — arrived during the state’s 14-day grace period in 2020.

For Alaska, with its vast geography and isolated communities often accessible only by air, the state’s 10-day grace period serves as a vital civic safeguard.

“The thought that the outcome of Watson v. RNC could reshape elections as soon as June is horrifying to me, and for thousands of Alaskans who will have to rethink the way they approach voting by Election Day,” said Michelle Sparck of Get Out the Native Vote.

Massachusetts faces particular timing constraints with its September 1 primary, leaving minimal turnaround time for preparing general election ballots. “You can’t turn these things around on a dime,” warned Debra O’Malley, spokesperson for the Massachusetts secretary of state’s office.

The Supreme Court established the “Purcell principle” following a 2006 Arizona case, recognizing that last-minute procedural changes can create electoral confusion. The principle generally guides courts to avoid altering election rules too close to voting.

Patrick, who worked in Maricopa County’s election office during that Arizona case, explained the reasoning: “When the rules of engagement change too close to the election, you don’t have sufficient time to notify the electorate and make clear that policy change.”

She expressed particular concern for rural voters, who often experience slower mail delivery and would face the highest risk of disenfranchisement if grace periods are eliminated.

The current legal challenge comes amid continued attacks on mail ballot systems by former President Donald Trump, who has falsely blamed them for his 2020 election loss. Election administrators nationwide have struggled to adjust to rapid changes in voting laws following these attacks. In Texas alone last year, 3,000 pieces of election-related legislation were introduced, requiring officials to prepare contingency plans months in advance.

While Aguilar expects Nevada officials will adapt to whatever the court decides, he remains concerned about potential disruption.

“To change the rules of the game in the middle of the competition does not do anyone any good,” he said.