The headline on Edith Olmsted's post was written the day of oral argument in Watson v. Republican National Committee.1 The body describes justices on the conservative side sounding "skeptical," with Justice Alito worrying about "a big stash of ballots" arriving late and Justice Gorsuch raising concerns about counting running past the seating of Congress.1 Those quotes are accurate, but questions at oral argument are not a ruling, and reporters who cover the Court know how often the two diverge.
Mississippi counts a mail ballot if it is postmarked by Election Day and received within five business days afterward.2 The Republican National Committee argued that federal statutes setting Election Day forbid counting anything received after that date.2 The question was the receipt deadline for a small share of ballots, not the existence of mail-in voting.2
On June 29, 2026, the Court ruled 5-4 for Mississippi. Justice Barrett wrote for the majority, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson.2 The holding: "the election-day statutes do not set a deadline for ballot receipt, so they do not prevent Mississippi from counting ballots postmarked before election day yet received afterward."23 Justice Alito dissented, joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, with Justice Kavanaugh joining most of the dissent.2
The Court that was supposedly "about to gut mail-in voting" ended up upholding the most generous version of the rule under challenge.
The "It sure looks like" hedge does not rescue a headline whose main claim is "gut mail-in voting." The phrase promised readers something far larger than the case could deliver in any outcome. Had the RNC won, ballots would have needed to arrive by Election Day in Mississippi and the thirteen or so states with similar grace periods.1 That is a meaningful change, but it is not the end of mail voting.
The post is still live under its original headline, three months after the Court proved it wrong.1 Readers who saw it in March and never followed up believe something about the Court that is not true.