In US Supreme Court case over which absentee ballots count, Alaska doesn’t pick a side

Alaska’s appointed attorney general on Friday filed a friends of the court brief in a case before the U.S. Supreme Court involving whether absentee ballots that arrive after Election Day can be counted.

The filing does not side with either party in the case, which arose in Mississippi.

Instead, it informs the court of the logistical hurdles in Alaska — far-flung villages, lack of roads and severe weather — that make it difficult to receive absentee ballots by Election Day.

Alaska, like roughly half the other states in the U.S., allows some ballots cast by Election Day to be received later, the brief says.

The case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, challenges a law in Mississippi that allows absentee ballots received shortly after Election Day to count if they are postmarked by Election Day.

The Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, the Libertarian Party of Mississippi and a Mississippi voter challenged the law in 2024. They argue that under federal law, ballots must received by state officials by Election Day to be counted.

The case could have national implications by influencing midterm elections, and comes amid baseless assertions from President Donald Trump that mail-in voting results in “MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD.”

The Alaska brief was filed by Jenna Lorence, the first Alaska solicitor general after Attorney General Stephen Cox created the role and appointed the Indiana attorney in October to fill it.

The 14-page brief says it does not support either party in the case.

The state’s impartiality drew criticism from an elections attorney, Scott Kendall, one of the main architects of the state’s ranked choice voting and open primary system.

“If you’re going to file something, take a position in favor of Alaska’s laws because they’re there for a very good reason,” Kendall said.

If the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down the law in Mississippi, that could lead to the disenfranchisement of many Alaska voters whose ballots arrive after Election Day, he said.

“Thousands upon thousands of Alaskans, through no fault of their own, wouldn’t be able to vote, and that’s not the democracy I signed up for,” Kendall said.

Under Alaska law, absentee ballots sent in state are counted if they are received “by the close of business on the 10th day after the election,” the filing says. Ballots from overseas must be received by the 15th day after the election.

Asked why the solicitor general did not take a position defending Alaska’s law or siding with either party, the Department of Law said in a statement emailed by spokesperson Sam Curtis:

“The State is committed to providing fair elections for Alaskans and will do so whatever rule the Court adopts. Alaska has previously filed these factual briefs to ensure courts understand the State’s unique perspective. Here, we wanted to ensure the Supreme Court knew how circumstances in Alaska make rules that might be simple in Mississippi more complicated in our State. We’re asking for clarity, so the Division of Elections and Alaska voters have straightforward rules to apply in the 2026 election.”

The filing notes that most Alaska communities are hard to reach.

“With over 80 percent of Alaskan communities off the road system, and extreme weather making access by boat or plane unreliable during certain months, including November, Alaska’s Division of Elections will continue to establish processes unlike any other State to ensure that its geography does not limit its citizens’ ability to vote,” the filing says. “Alaska asks that as this Court crafts a rule in this case, it provide clear parameters for Alaska to apply.”

The filing provides examples of how determining when a ballot was “received” by the Division of Elections is not always clearly defined, the Department of Law said.

In some cases, even in-person votes can struggle to reach the state elections division due to weather and geographical challenges, the filing says.

In 2024, poll workers in Atqasuk in northern Alaska tallied the votes cast on Election Day, but could not reach the elections division by phone that night.

So they “placed the ballots and tally sheets into a secure package and mailed them to the Division, who did not receive them until nine days later,” the filing says. “This exemplifies the hurdles that the Division regularly faces to receive and count votes from rural areas.”

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals held that ballots must “be both cast by voters and received by state officials” by Election Day, the filing says.

“While that rule may invalidate laws like Mississippi’s delayed receipt deadline, what does it do in a situation like Atqasuk, where votes were cast and received by some poll workers on election day, but state officials did not receive the physical ballots or vote tallies until days later?” the filing says.

“Even more standardized voting situations in Alaska raise these questions,” the filing says.

“For example, when a voter casts an in-person absentee ballot in a remote area shortly before election day, the absentee voting official must send the ballot (in its unopened absentee ballot envelope) to the regional office, which may take some time,” the filing says. “Is the ballot ‘received’ the day it is turned over to the voting official? Or is it ‘received’ only once it reaches the regional office, where, for the first time, the Division evaluates eligibility before opening the envelope and counting the ballot within?”

“While it is clear when a ballot is ‘cast’ in Alaska (meaning that the vote cannot be changed), when certain ballots are actually ‘received’ is open to different interpretations, especially given the connectivity challenges for Alaska’s far-flung boroughs,” the filing says.

Alaska Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom, who oversees elections, said in a prepared statement that Alaska wants the Supreme Court “to provide clear guidance that protects election integrity while recognizing Alaska’s logistical challenges, so every eligible voter can make their voice heard.”

Cox said in the statement that Alaska wants the court to “consider how a rule that seems straightforward in some states might raise more questions in others. All we want is clarity in the rules.”

The filing also points out that for absentee ballots, many voters rely on the United States Postal Service.

“But unlike in other states, where mail delivery can be accomplished by simply driving to someone’s house via a continuous road system, USPS must use creative solutions to reach 82 percent of Alaskan communities,” the filing says.

In a separate matter, new guidelines from the U.S. Postal Service could also lead to votes not being counted across the U.S.

The postal service said on Dec. 24 it cannot guarantee that it will postmark ballots the same day they are put into a mailbox.