Decision in Mail Ballot Case Could Have Major Impact on New York State Politics
By: Joseph T. Burns
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear the appeal of a 5th Circuit decision holding Mississippi’s mail ballot receipt deadline to be in violation of federal law could have significant implications for how New York conducts its elections and how campaigns in the state plan for them. The Court will consider whether a state may count mail ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive afterward, or whether federal law prohibits the counting of these late-arriving mail ballots. New York, Mississippi, and fourteen other states allow ballots postmarked but arriving after Election Day to be counted.
For New York political candidates, consultants, and party officials, the practical effects of a decision disallowing the canvassing of late-arriving mail ballots could be substantial. Campaigns currently plan their voter outreach, ballot-chase operations, and get-out-the-vote efforts with the understanding that ballots mailed by Election Day will still count if they arrive later in the week. If federal law were interpreted to require ballots to be received by Election Day, campaigns may shift resources toward earlier mail-ballot education, earlier get-out-the-vote messaging, and more aggressive follow-up to ensure timely returns.
Due to a 2021 amendment to the Election Law, Boards of Elections in New York now begin processing absentee and early mail ballots as they arrive before Election Day. The results, however, are not released until after polls close on Election Day. Because the receipt deadline extends beyond Election Day, final tallies often depend on ballots that continue to arrive in the days after Election Day. If those later-arriving ballots could no longer be counted, results in close races would likely be determined more quickly.
The case also highlights how closely campaign planning is tied to statutory timelines. Many of a campaign’s logistical and strategic decisions—such as when to begin voter contact programs and when to begin the direct mail campaign—are shaped by the Election Law’s mail ballot application and return provisions. A change in how federal law is interpreted could force campaigns to rethink how they plan voter outreach for mail voting.
The Court’s review of this 5th Circuit decision signals that the relationship between federal law and state election administration may remain an area of legal uncertainty. New York’s candidates, political consultants, and party leaders would be wise to pay close attention to the outcome of this case. Any shift in how mail ballots are to be canvassed could result in new state legislation, fresh guidance for local Boards of Elections, and significant adjustments in campaign strategy in future elections.
