The United States Supreme Court is finally ruling on an issue (Watson v RNC) that should have been decided long ago: the dissonant practice of accepting ballots after the Election Day deadline.

This case could indeed shift the 2026 midterms in Republicans’ favor, since Democrats often win by broad and unjustified election expansion, which opens the door to cheating, stuffing, and undoing the vote.

More election cases are coming before the United States Supreme Court, and the conservative majority looks more inclined to bring the much-needed order and common sense back to our elections.

Why would the RNC sue Mississippi, of all places? It’s a ruby red state, after all, where even Elvis Presley’s Democratic cousin could not get elected Governor.

This decision was a masterstroke. Democratic states have mostly expanded this corrupt effort, allowing ballots to be counted long after the Election Day deadline. If a Republican organization went after a Democratic state, the proponents of these “grace period” laws could have argued that the RNC is targeting election reforms they don’t like in states where they can’t win. Instead of arguing the merits of the case, the RNC would have wasted time and resources explaining to federal courts that their interest is in the fairness of the vote as opposed to the pursuit of partisan assistance or advantage.

For the record, the RNC deserves more credit than they are receiving for fighting off election fraud machinations and seeking to restore election integrity in our voting practices. They jumped ahead of the problems, potential, and actually, long before Election Day in 2024, warding off a repeat of the failures and questions that dominated the 2020 election results.  

How do we want the court to rule in Watson? What should this first set of election reforms look like?

Justice Samuel Alito could not have summed it up better:

“We have lots of phrases that involve........

© Townhall