The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that federal law does not prohibit states from counting mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day, provided state law authorizes it and the ballots are postmarked on time. The 5-4 decision, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett and joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's three liberal justices, allows states to continue practices that extend the counting period beyond Election Day. A dissenting opinion from Justice Samuel Alito argued the ruling conflicts with federal election law and historical practice.
Republican officials in California, including gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton, have strongly condemned the ruling. Hilton called the decision “an insult” and an “affront to democracy,” predicting it would energize conservatives. "Thanks to this ridiculous, anti-democratic ruling, I am more sure than ever that change is coming," Hilton stated.
Republicans have raised concerns about the potential for fraud and the erosion of public confidence in election outcomes. Hilton specifically criticized California's election system, questioning the counting of ballots without proper postmarks and the ability to "back-date" ballots. Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, founder of Reform California, echoed these concerns, arguing that California's election rules already exceed what the Supreme Court permitted and called for tighter regulations on late-arriving ballots.
Rep. Vince Fong, who represents California's 20th congressional district, stated that the ruling allows states to continue down a path of