Massachusetts’ highest court upholds new mail-in voting law


The new law makes so-called “no excuse” absentee ballots and early ballots permanent in Massachusetts elections.

A voter casts their ballot during a mail-in vote at Boston City Hall in Boston, Massachusetts. Scott Eisen/Bloomberg

BOSTON (AP) — A Republican-led effort in Massachusetts to block election officials from enacting the state’s new mail-in and early voting law was thrown out Monday by the Supreme Judicial Court of the state.

The decision ensures that Massachusetts residents will be able to take advantage of expanded voter options this year.

  • Nathan Klima for the Boston Globe

    Suffolk DA prospect Ricardo Arroyo slams Boston police’s ‘insufficient’ response to white supremacist march

  • Mayor Wu announces proposed new polling stations after rehearsal

Opponents had argued that the new law — dubbed the VOTES Act — violated the state constitution.

The bill was signed into law by Republican Gov. Charlie Baker in late June after clearing the Democratic-controlled state legislature. State election officials have already begun preparing more than 4.7 million ballot applications to send to voters by July 23 ahead of the Sept. 6 primary.

The new law makes so-called “no excuse” absentee ballots and early ballots permanent in Massachusetts elections. It also increases access to the ballot for voters with disabilities, overseas military personnel, and incarcerated individuals, and takes steps to modernize the state’s election administration process.

Many of the voting options included in the new law were implemented during the height of the coronavirus pandemic and proved popular.

Suffrage advocates welcomed Monday’s decision.

“Today’s decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Court means that voters will be able to rely on the provisions of the VOTES Act in the upcoming election. This is a great victory for suffrage in Massachusetts,” said Geoff Foster, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts.

The state GOP had argued that the expansion of mail-in and early voting during the pandemic was meant to be only temporary until normal voting practices can resume and voters must again vote in person on election day, with some exceptions.

They argue that voters can only request an absentee ballot if they meet one of the exemptions set out in the state constitution, such as being out of town on Election Day or incapacitated, due to a disability. physique or religious beliefs, to vote in person. That day.

Lawyers for Commonwealth Secretary William Galvin, a Democrat whose office oversees elections, argued the new law was appropriate, saying that under the state constitution, the legislature has broad powers to regulate the elections and is not as tightly confined as Republicans suggest.

Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jim Lyons had expressed hope that the court would agree with the party when it filed the lawsuit last month.

“There’s a reason we have three branches of government, and we’re confident the Supreme Court will strike down and strike down the Democrats’ unconstitutional permanent expansion of mail-in voting,” Lyons said at the time.

Massachusetts joins 34 states and Washington, DC in offering “no excuse” mail-in voting, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.


Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor.
Back to top button