The United States Supreme Court has issued a 5-4 ruling upholding state laws that permit the counting of mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day but received subsequently.

美國最高法院發布了一項 5 比 4 的裁決，支持州法律允許計票在選舉日後收到、但郵戳日期在選舉日之前的郵寄選票。

The judicial determination in Watson v. Republican National Committee centered on the interpretation of 19th-century federal statutes establishing a uniform national Election Day. The Republican National Committee and the Trump administration contended that these statutes mandate a strict receipt deadline, asserting that an election is legally concluded only when all ballots are in official custody. This position was previously supported by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that federal law preempts state-level grace periods.

Watson 訴共和黨全國委員會案的司法裁定，核心在於對 19 世紀建立統一全國選舉日的聯邦法令之解釋。共和黨全國委員會與川普政府主張，這些法令要求必須有嚴格的收到期限，認為只有在所有選票都由官方保管後，選舉在法律上才算結束。這個立場先前得到了第五巡迴上訴法院的支持，該法院認為聯邦法優先於州級的寬限期。

Conversely, the majority opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett and joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberal justices, posited that federal law regulates the date by which the electorate must execute their choice, rather than the administrative deadline for ballot receipt. Justice Barrett noted that the absence of a federal receipt deadline allows states to maintain discretionary procedures, citing the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act as evidence of congressional intent to defer receipt deadlines to state law. Furthermore, the majority rejected the notion that modern voting practices must be constrained by 19th-century administrative norms.

相反地，由大法官 Amy Coney Barrett 撰寫，並由首席大法官 John Roberts 與三位自由派大法官共同支持的多數意見認為，聯邦法規管的是選民必須做出選擇的日期，而非收到選票的行政期限。Barrett 大法官指出，由於聯邦法未規定收到選票的期限，因此州政府可以維持酌情處理程序，並引用《軍人及海外公民缺席投票法》作為國會打算將收到期限交由州法決定之證據。此外，多數派拒絕接受現代投票方式必須受 19 世紀行政規範限制的觀念。

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito argued that the inclusion of late-arriving ballots effectively postpones the election date and may compromise electoral integrity. He suggested that such practices could facilitate voter fraud and erode public confidence in the legitimacy of results. This sentiment was echoed by President Donald Trump, who characterized the ruling as a significant loss and advocated for the passage of the Save America Act to mandate photo identification and restrict mail-in voting.

在一份反對意見書中，Samuel Alito 大法官認為，計入遲到選票實際上推遲了選舉日期，且可能損害選舉誠信。他建議此類做法可能會助長選票舞弊，並削弱公眾對結果合法性的信心。川普總統亦呼應此觀點，將該裁決形容為重大損失，並倡導通過《拯救美國法案》以強制要求提供照片身分證明並限制郵寄投票。

Institutional implications extend to approximately 30 states, including California and Mississippi, that employ various grace periods. While some stakeholders argue these measures ensure disenfranchisement does not occur due to postal delays, critics maintain they contribute to protracted tabulation timelines. California officials have responded to these concerns by proposing infrastructure investments and technological upgrades to accelerate processing without eliminating the grace period.

制度上的影響延伸至約 30 個州，包括加州與密西西比州，這些州均採用了不同的寬限期。雖然部分利益相關者認為這些措施可確保不會因郵政延遲而導致選民被剝奪投票權，但批評者堅持這會導致計票時間被拉長。加州官員回應這些疑慮，建議透過基礎設施投資與技術升級來加速處理，而非取消寬限期。

The ruling preserves the legality of post-election ballot receipt deadlines in numerous states, maintaining the current administrative status quo for the upcoming midterm elections.

該裁決保留了許多州在選舉後收到選票期限的合法性，維持了即將到來的中期選舉之行政現狀。