Filed Date: Feb. 5, 2024
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case challenged the legality of Mississippi’s absentee-balloting procedures, specifically the state’s “Ballot Receipt Deadline” statute that extended the deadline for receipt of absentee ballots by five business days past election day, so that ballots postmarked on or before the date of election and received by the registrar no more than five business days after the election would be counted.
On February 5, 2024, the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (LPMS) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi against the Harrison County Clerk and Registrar, five members of the Harrison County Election Commission, and the Mississippi Secretary of State. LPMS alleged that Mississippi’s absentee ballot receipt deadline, codified in Mississippi Code § 23-15-637(1)(a), violated federal law because it extended the deadline for receipt of absentee ballots by five business days after Election Day. The plaintiff asserted that the five-day extension conflicted with the uniform federal Election Day established by Congress under 2 U.S.C. §§ 1, 7, and 3 U.S.C. § 1. The complaint further contended that the Electoral Count Reform Act (ECRA), which revised the process of casting and counting electoral votes for presidential elections, permitted such extensions only in cases of "force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic," none of which occurred for the November 5, 2024, federal election, and therefore that use of the five-day extension in that election violated federal law. The plaintiff argued that Mississippi’s extended deadline unlawfully diluted the votes of timely voters, disproportionately harmed minor political parties like the LPMS, and imposed unnecessary financial burdens on candidates monitoring post-election canvassing, ultimately undermining the integrity of federal elections. LPMS claimed violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the Elections Clause (Art. I, § 4, cl. 1), and the Electors Clause (Art. II, § 1, cl. 4), and sought declaratory and injunctive relief, including a permanent injunction barring enforcement of the extension statute, temporary relief pending litigation, and an award of costs and attorneys’ fees. The case was originally assigned to District Judge Taylor B. McNeel, but on February 8, 2024, Judge McNeel recused himself from the case, which was reassigned to District Judge Louis Guiola, Jr.
On March 1, 2024, the court consolidated this action with a similar lawsuit filed by the Republican National Committee (RNC), the Mississippi Republican Party, James "Pete" Perry, and Matthew Lamb (Republican National Committee v. Wetzel, Case No. 1:24-cv-00025), designating the RNC lawsuit as the lead case. Consequently, on July 29, 2024, the court ordered that this consolidated case be dismissed with prejudice. Developments in the consolidated action are summarized here.
On October 25, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment in RNC v. Wetzel, holding that the federal Election Day statutes preempt Mississippi’s law and mandate that all ballots must be received by Election Day. The court found that the term “election” includes both casting and receipt of ballots and relied on historical practice arguments.
On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the challenged statute, allowing a grace period for mail-in ballots that are postmarked by election day but arrive up to five business days later. Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson joining the opinion. The opinion concluded that the federal election-day statutes refer to election day narrowly as the deadline for individuals to vote to choose a candidate, and do not speak to the day of ballot receipt. Therefore, the statutes do not prevent states from counting ballots postmarked on or before election day but received afterward.
The majority found that the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) confirms that federal law dictates when ballots must be cast, and state law governs when the ballots must be received. UOCAVA permits absent military and overseas voters to cast absentee ballots in federal elections and requires States to count these ballots, establishing a federal absentee voting system. In detailing the system, the statutes presuppose ballot receipt as a matter of state law. Justice Barrett disagreed with the Plaintiff’s argument that, because Congress enacted two of the three election day statutes implicated in the case when there was no mail-in voting, the use of the word “election" necessarily means that the ballots must be received by Election Day. The opinion stated that this theory would mean we are governed by 19th-century voting practices, which would call into question how modern elections work, with features such as early voting. Justice Barrett stated for the majority that “statutes do not ‘tra[p] in amber’ every contemporary practice on the same subject matter.” The majority argued that historical practice alone is not controlling, as the Plaintiffs cannot precisely tie these practices to the text of the election-day statutes.
The opinion agreed with the plaintiffs that their policy arguments regarding election integrity are properly directed to legislatures and not courts. The majority opinion also commented on the plaintiff’s argument that the challenged law gave rise to the appearance of fraud, as election results may appear to flip after election day. The majority stated that these last-minute flips are possible as election-day statutes set no deadline for counting ballots or certifying election results. The court called on the legislature to make any changes deemed necessary by the electorate for a national solution. This judgment reversed the Fifth Circuit Court’s decision made in RNC v. Wetzel, and the Court remanded the case back to the Fifth Circuit for further proceedings.
Justice Samuel Alito authored the dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh joining most of it. The dissent stated that, under federal law, the electorate's collective choice must be expressed on Election Day, and Justice Alito grounded that position in history: ballot collection must be completed on Election Day, as it was when all voting occurred in person under the first election-day statutes. that embody the electorate’s collective choice must be completed on Election Day, as was done when all voting was done in person when the first election-day statutes were enacted. The dissent also argued that allowing a grace period in ballot receipt deadlines risks undermining Americans' confidence in election integrity and creates opportunities for voter fraud, particularly through mail-in ballots.
Summary Authors
Madeline Dollard (6/19/2026)
Republican National Committee v. Wetzel, Southern District of Mississippi (2024)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68223690/parties/libertarian-party-of-mississippi-v-wetzel/
Guirola, Louis (Mississippi)
Nobile, T. Russell (Mississippi)
Gov, Rex M. (Mississippi)
Holleman, Tim C. (Mississippi)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68223690/libertarian-party-of-mississippi-v-wetzel/
Last updated July 22, 2026, 3:48 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations By the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: Feb. 5, 2024
Closing Date: June 29, 2026
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
The Libertarian Party of Mississippi (LPMS)
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
County
Harrison County Clerk and Registrar Mississippi
Members of Harrison County Election Commission
State
Mississippi Secretary of State
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
Southern District of Mississippi 1:24-cv-00037
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Voting:
Case Summary of Libertarian Party of Mississipi v. Wetzel, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/47137/ (last updated 6/19/2026).