· 51 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Mar 28, 2026 at 1:18 PM

Supreme Court mulls limiting mail-in ballots, forcing states to prepare for changes

Posted by thehill

🚩 Report this post

51 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
CouchCorrespondent Mar 28, 2026 +165
So the "Animal Farm" pig in the White House could do a mail-in ballot, but the rest of us lowly farm animals have to see if we can be allowed. Got it.
165
blues111 Mar 28, 2026 +48
This ruling would be about if ballots recieved after election day but postmarked on election day should still be counted Its still fucked up cause as long as its sent on election day it should count, and frankly states should be left to decide if they can count them after Eday or not
48
Geek_Ken Mar 28, 2026 +61
Gets even more messed up that USPS can obtain ballots in the mail, but hold off postmarking them. So you "mailed" it early, but a delay in postmarking it means it becomes invalid. We are so f&$ked.
61
barneyrubbble Mar 28, 2026 +55
It's even worse than that. SCOTUS just ruled that USPS can't be held liable for non-delivery, **even if it's deliberate.**
55
QuillnSofa Mar 28, 2026 +24
It goes with an earlier ruling the post office is now has immunity when/if they intentionally don't deliver your valid mail.
24
RedditReader4031 Mar 28, 2026 +3
You can request that any item be hand postmarked at the counter.
3
whoisbill Mar 28, 2026 +7
The point is to make it harder for people. Which this does. My state lets you drop the ballot off at an elections office, which I do. Still beats waiting in line. But there is no reason why it needs to be harder for people.
7
RedditReader4031 Mar 28, 2026 -8
The argument that voting is a critical, Constitutional right loses weight when we aren’t willing to put much effort into casting a ballot. For most of this country’s history, voting was in person during certain hours on one day. A century ago when people commonly worked 60 or more hours, they were somehow able to vote.
-8
whoisbill Mar 28, 2026 +7
A century ago not everyone was allowed to vote, they used tactics to make it harder for black people and woman to vote. It wasn't until 1965 that those hurdles were removed. So the assertion that 1) everyone voted, when they literally could not is not true and also 2)that it being an effort to actually cast a vote is what makes it meaningful is what was used to make point 1 a reality IE, make it harder for non white men to vote. I mean. It's history. We all know it so not sure how you come here saying "make it like 100 years ago" unless you think only white men should vote? What makes voting meaningful is people putting thought behind it, spending the time to learn the issues and educate themselves on what is happening. Not waiting in long lines, or needing to go through hoop after hoop just to cast the ballot itself. That's putting road blocks in place to prevent people from actually voting. Insane that we have come this far and have so many years of history to look back on and this still needs to be explained. You literally used "a century ago" as your point of reference for when voting was awesome, when a century ago people were blocked from voting based on their skin color. Insane.
7
RedditReader4031 Mar 28, 2026 -6
Those who were not allowed to vote were not barred by the lack of early voting locations and mail in voting policies. They were prohibited by law. That’s two separate voting issues. My point stands.
-6
whoisbill Mar 28, 2026 +7
They weren't laws though. The Constitution made it clear that everyone had a right to vote. So they added blockades, not laws to make it harder and harder for minorities to vote. That changed with the civil rights act. What you want to happen again is for those blockades to be added again like "centuries ago" when only white men could vote. Just say it. Mail in voting started in the civil war and carried forward. States started adding more and more reasons to allow people to mail in vote. In 1978, almost 50 years ago, CA removed needing a specific reason and other states started following as well. Some states have been only mail in vote for decades. So history isn't on your side here. History has shown that making it easier for people to actually vote had been the priority not with way.
7
StephanXX Mar 28, 2026 +5
The argument is that Democrats shouldn't be allowed to vote. GOP leaders are _bragging_ about this point. Voting should be compulsory. Citizenship isn't a privilege, it's an obligation.
5
RedditReader4031 Mar 28, 2026 -2
So, in the course of exercising our freedoms, you’d fine or incarcerate people for not voting?
-2
StephanXX Mar 28, 2026 +7
Yes. It's incredibly effective in Australia, for example. You're free to check a "opt out" box on the ballot, but you're not free to abdicate your civic responsibility, same as taxes and jury duty. I'll note that the process should be easy. If receiving your photo identification in the mail is considered secure, than sending and receiving your ballot should as well.
7
RedditReader4031 Mar 28, 2026 -2
When I am away from work, I do not get paid. In your view I can either pay a fine, go to jail or take a hit on payday so that you can mandate my actions.
-2
SnooLobsters6766 Mar 28, 2026 +2
They stopped doing local postmarking here, letters ship 100 miles before being postmarked. Cost my friend a fair amount of late fees on his property taxes.
2
StanDaMan1 Mar 28, 2026 +1
Washington State has specified drop off points for Mall-In Ballots, so be aware of where you can find those.
1
gnubian Mar 28, 2026 +1
If you take them to a post office window, you can get it date stamped for that same day. We're processed a business day later where I live (rural) if it's just dropped in the box but, I had it confirmed that anything can receive a same day postmark as long as you use the window.
1
Geek_Ken Mar 28, 2026 +1
Yup. Mail in voting and to make sure it's properly postmarked.... you drive to the post office during their working hours and drop it off with the staff there. Totally convenient. EDIT: Not pooh pooing your comment. It's a solid work-around to make sure your early vote is counted. Just kills me we make voting so hard in this country, especially when mail in voting is popular and secure.
1
suttin Mar 28, 2026 +2
Honestly walking it into the post office is the most secure option, and what most people should do if they have time for mail in ballots right now. I wouldn’t trust unattended drop boxes for a while now
2
we_are_sex_bobomb Mar 28, 2026 +3
And they also recently decided that the postal service can’t be sued for deliberately losing or delaying mail deliveries. What an odd coincidence.
3
we_are_sex_bobomb Mar 28, 2026 +4
The hypocrisy is the point. Mike Johnson was just called out on this and his explanation is that some states do mail in voting responsibly, like Florida, and others don’t, like California. He is literally advocating that America needs to have double standards for voting laws, based on which party that state tends to swing towards.
4
ubelblatt Mar 28, 2026 +2
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
2
supercali45 Mar 28, 2026 +2
SCOTUS 6 are traitors to this country
2
Adrianswiftcloud Mar 28, 2026
Well if there is a loop hole in the tax code you need to plug the gap. But until the gap is plugged, it would be silly not to take advantage of the gaps
0
CriticalMuscle9659 Mar 28, 2026 +6
It f****** kills me that he said this and that nobody really listened
6
Late-Instance666 Mar 28, 2026 +31
We’re basically living through a gritty reboot of the 19th century at this point. it’s like watching a movie where the protagonists keep finding new ways to lock the doors while screaming about "security," but everyone in the theater knows they just don't want the neighbors coming over to vote. at this rate, by 2028, you'll probably need to hand-deliver your ballot to a golden box guarded by a sphinx that only accepts riddles as ID.
31
barneyrubbble Mar 28, 2026 +26
The fact that the RNC has one justification for early voting and another justification for disallowing postmarked votes to be counted after election day shows that they don't give two fucks about fair elections. This is simply a mercenary position that they think will benefit them. A legitimate SCOTUS would tell them to f*** off, not contemplate on this obvious bullshit.
26
RoutineCowMan Mar 28, 2026 +8
The fact that they’re RNC is enough of an explanation. Just evil rotten people.
8
me-at_day-min Mar 28, 2026 +3
Both Roberts and Coney Barrett brought up this specific issue. I don't think either of them are going to go for limiting mail in ballots
3
Iyellkhan Mar 28, 2026 +12
Im old enough to remember SCOTUS having a rule that you cant change the rules too close to an election...
12
xicor Mar 28, 2026 +3
Only applies when republicans want it to
3
fairoaks2 Mar 28, 2026 +6
They’ve made the President above the law so destroying the way we vote is next on the Project 2025 agenda. Birth Right Citizenship get ready.
6
CriticalMuscle9659 Mar 28, 2026 +3
The best part , though, is that other than 2020, way more conservatives used elective mail in ballots.  IDK about the states that are primarily mail in, but the whole damn thing was mostly pushed by the gop in those rural , desolate farm states with huge low population districts. 
3
Greencheek16 Mar 28, 2026 +6
They'll make sure only those votes get counted. Millions of blue votes will be "lost". 
6
Belichick12 Mar 28, 2026 +3
It’s cool because the Supreme Court ruled the post office doesn’t even need to deliver mail. So they could decide any democratic aligned area they just don’t deliver to the return address of the ballots.
3
WTFudge52 Mar 28, 2026 +2
If the president is too lazy to vote in person at a polling location 5 blocks away and uses mail in voting. I'm not sure there is any good excuse to block mail in voting across the country. He literally had a secret service detail he could have bypassed the lines with and mailed in his ballot. The hypocrisy is already off the charts mail in voting has been used by the military as long if not longer than America has been a country. More Republicans have been caught voting twice than all illegals votes ever cast.
2
Specialist_String_64 Mar 28, 2026 +3
I just want voting to be made compulsory AND all ballots include "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as an option for all positions. Then limit elected officials' power based on actual percentage of all votes. Add in ranked choice amd get rid of parties and I would be in election heaven.
3
Miserable_Pie_8337 Mar 29, 2026 +3
Sorry, it's too close to the election to change things... right, Republicans?
3
mjb85858 Mar 28, 2026 +3
[I hope they all remember the order that these things go.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_boxes_of_liberty) Soap Box -> Ballot Box -> Jury Box -> Ammo Box. They’re locking up the first two boxes, and have basically ignored and weaseled their way out of the third.
3
InevitableAvalanche Mar 28, 2026 +2
Trump mailed his ballot in. Supreme Court is illegitimate.
2
Avoidtolls Mar 28, 2026 +2
F****** Trump can do it be **we the people** can't? F*** all that. We The People...1776
2
alabasterskim Mar 29, 2026 +2
I hope they realize there's a good deal more of their own voters that actually need to use mail in ballots while they're just a convenience for Dems. Like, they've gotten so high off their own supply they forgot they're the ones selling it.
2
GestureArtist Mar 28, 2026 +3
Trump won the election right? This is not an issue. Case closed. So what's the case here? (besides trying to destroy democracy)
3
RedditReader4031 Mar 28, 2026 +1
The point of contention is the speed with which election results are forthcoming. Allowing mail in ballots to arrive after Election Day causes delays when the polling place results are close. This is further complicated by states like Pennsylvania which prohibits earlier received mailed in ballots from being opened and counted before the evening of Election Day.
1
Ok-Annual50 Mar 28, 2026 -1
[357073272\_685527193678858\_8598320203110126099\_n.jpg (720×677)](file:///D:/Supreme%20court/357073272_685527193678858_8598320203110126099_n.jpg)
-1
KzooCurmudgeon Mar 28, 2026 -6
I feel like the counting used to be done in one day and now it’s a week
-6
VioletPaissa2077 Mar 28, 2026 +4
Counting has pretty much always taken days to weeks to finish up, but elections are often called earlier if the outcome is clear and unlikely to be impacted by the remaining uncounted votes.
4
HermanGulch Mar 28, 2026 +2
And there were a string of elections from 1980 until 2000 that weren't very close. Since 2000, the elections have been much closer.
2
srush32 Mar 28, 2026 +1
Depends - in 2004, Washington's governor race wasn't certified until Nov 29th, and the court cases delayed the offical result until December 30th
1
fuzzy_one Mar 28, 2026 +1
It’s the lawsuits that the losers file really drag things out.
1
← Back to Board