## Facts

- Wisconsin scheduled a statewide election for April 7, 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, producing a surge in absentee-ballot requests and administrative delays.
- Wisconsin law required absentee ballots to be received by 8 p.m. on Election Day to be counted.
- Voters and Democratic organizations sued in federal district court seeking, among other relief, an extension of the deadline for requesting absentee ballots, an extension of the deadline for receipt of absentee ballots to April 13, and a delay in reporting results.
- In their preliminary-injunction motions, plaintiffs did not request an order counting ballots mailed and postmarked after Election Day.
- The district court issued a preliminary injunction extending the receipt deadline to April 13 and requiring that ballots received by April 13 be counted even if postmarked after April 7.
- Republican organizations sought a stay in the Seventh Circuit limited to the extension affecting the return deadline; the Seventh Circuit denied relief.
- The Supreme Court considered an emergency application for a stay of the district court’s order to the extent it required counting ballots postmarked after April 7.

## Issues

1. Whether a federal court may order Wisconsin to count absentee ballots postmarked after Election Day, so long as they are received by an extended deadline, when state law requires mailing/postmarking by Election Day.
2. Whether ordering acceptance of ballots cast after Election Day, days before the election, improperly alters election rules close to an election.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court granted the stay in a per curiam order.
- The district court’s injunction was stayed only insofar as it required counting absentee ballots postmarked after April 7, 2020.
- The extension of the receipt deadline to April 13 remained in effect, but only ballots mailed and postmarked by April 7 could be counted.
- The Court relied on the proximity to the election, the district court’s grant of relief beyond what plaintiffs requested, and precedent counseling against late judicial changes to election rules.
- Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, dissented, warning the stay would prevent some voters who timely requested absentee ballots from voting due to pandemic-related delays.

## Legal Principles

- Federal courts should generally avoid changing election rules close to an election, particularly changes that risk confusion or alter the nature of the election (the Purcell principle).
- Extending the deadline by which ballots may be cast after Election Day is materially different from extending administrative deadlines for receipt of ballots already cast by Election Day.
- On emergency stay applications in election cases, the Court may halt lower-court relief that departs from state-law time limits and is ordered at the last moment, especially where the relief exceeds what the movants sought.

## Conclusion

The Court permitted Wisconsin to count ballots received after Election Day only if they were mailed and postmarked by Election Day, concluding that a federal court should not, on the eve of an election, require counting ballots cast after the date state law sets for voting.


Republican Nat'l Comm. v. Democratic Nat'l Comm., 140 S. Ct. 1205 (2020)