Californians love mail-in voting. That may have to change come November

Most California voters cast their ballots by mail, but two big federal changes are in the pipeline that could impact how those ballots are handled and counted in the November election.

One could come from a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that’s expected soon, and another through the United States Postal service, which is working to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive order that would give the agency the final say over who receives a mail-in ballot.

The efforts come as Trump and his allies have scrutinized mail-in ballots for years, claiming without evidence that states with longer count times and universal mail-in voting are allowing widespread cheating. Research shows fraud rates remain extremely small.

A major ruling could end mail-in grace periods

Fourteen states, including California, count mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day, as long as they are postmarked by then and show up within a certain window. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hand down a decision that could end that kind of grace period.

The case in question is Watson v. Republican National Committee, which centers on whether Mississippi’s five-day grace period for late-arriving ballots is constitutional under federal law. In California, that period is seven days.

Geoffrey Skelley,  chief elections analyst at Decision Desk HQ, told LAist the RNC’s argument centers on a federal law enacted in 1845 that set Election Day as the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, and that’s why votes shouldn’t be accepted after it.

A decision on that is expected to come within the next month, according to Wren Orey, who directs the elections project at the Bipartisan Policy Center. The Washington D.C.-based think tank works with both sides of the political aisle to craft policy suggestions.

Orey told LAist it’s looking like the justices will side with the RNC and overturn Mississippi’s law. However, it’s not known how broad the ruling could be. The Purcell principle, a legal doctrine that discourages last-minute changes to election procedures, could also be invoked.

“ It’s possible that the Supreme Court rules that this specific statute is unconstitutional, but their judgment doesn’t go into effect until after the election,” they said.

Some critics say the Supreme Court has unevenly applied this principle, pointing to how a ruling affected Alabama’s primary when voters had already begun casting ballots.

How it could affect California

Just over 400,000 ballots arrived during California’s grace period in 2024 — that’s 2.5% of voter turnout. Orey said these usually come from areas that take more time for mail carriers to deliver, so it could disadvantage rural residents, for example. It’s unclear if there would be a carve out for service members and overseas voters under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, which get rejected at higher rates.

The Bipartisan Policy Center’s research shows about the same rate of late ballot rejections between states with a grace period and those without, Orey said, suggesting that voters adapt to their state’s deadline.

“What isn’t clear, though, is how long it takes for voters to adjust,” they said, adding that they’ve seen some evidence of rejections going up immediately after a grace period goes away.

Workers count Los Angeles County ballots in the City of Industry on June 3.

(

Kayla Bartkowski

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

Skelley said a lot of voters would likely become aware and adjust in part because of how publicized the decision would be, but it wouldn’t solve everything.

“Now, does that mean some would be affected and might miss out on a chance to vote?” he said. “Yes, that’s perfectly plausible.”

California is also notoriously criticized for how long it takes to count ballots, even though that’s a feature, not a bug, of our election process. If the justices decide to end grace periods, don’t expect big changes to that.

That’s mostly because our slowness stems from the volume of mail-in ballots received on Election Day, Orey said. Those need to be verified, opened and flattened to be processed, which takes more time than if you voted in person.

Changes to universal mail-in ballots

Another looming change comes from Trump’s March executive order which, among many things, tasks the U.S. Postal Service with being a gatekeeper for who gets a mail-in ballot.

This is happening in the name of preventing noncitizens from voting, which is already rare and gets prosecuted.

USPS released its proposed rules earlier this month. Under the proposal, states would be required to send names of eligible mail-in voters to USPS, who would add them to a centralized list. If your name isn’t on that list for some reason, the Postal Service won’t mail your ballot.

This also depends on whether states agree to share voter information with the federal government, which California has so far refused to do in other situations.

“ Let’s say California and some states like it don’t give the federal government the information that they want,” Skelley said. “Presumably, that would mean that some people who have been voting by mail would not be able to get their mail ballots, and so they would have to figure out alternate ways to vote.”

Under federal law, states and Congress can determine how elections are run, so Trump’s executive order is seen by some as unconstitutional. It’s being challenged in court in multiple cases — one of which California is part of.

Among the concerns, it’s unclear what recourse voters would have to resolve errors, how accurate the data will be and what would happen if a voter requested a mail-in ballot after USPS’s deadline to add voters to the list.

The U.S. Postal Service may soon decide who to send mail-in ballots to.

(

Nathan Howard

/

Getty Images

)

Orey said they have talked to state election officials who don’t have a lot of trust in the Postal Service to handle ingesting and updating lists from every state, based on how the agency manages current operations and deadlines.

“We have no evidence to indicate that the infrastructure exists to begin with, or is at all functional,” they said.

Under Trump’s executive order, the final rule is due by the end of July — that is, of course, if it’s not delayed by the courts.

These rules would apply to federal elections, but not to primaries or ballots under the UOCAVA (the act for service members and overseas voters), according to the proposal. If you want to have your say, USPS is accepting public comment through July 2.