2 WATSON v. REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ALITO, J., dissenting electorate authoritatively expresses its choices, and what the election-day statutes demand is that this authoritative choice be made on election day. If ballots received after election day are added to the set of ballots that dictate the election’s outcome, the electorate’s choice does not occur on election day, and the federal election-day statutes are violated. In this case, we must apply this interpretation of the federal election-day statutes to a Mississippi law that requires state election officials to accept ballots that arrive up to five days after election day. The acceptance of these late-arriving ballots effectively postpones the date on which the electorate’s choice is made, and federal law precludes that postponement. For this reason, I would affirm the decision below, which held that the provision of Mississippi law requiring acceptance of late ballots violates federal law. Because the Court reverses that decision based on a flawed understanding of the election-day statutes, I respectfully dissent. I For more than 100 years, federal law has designated “the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November” as the day on which United States Senators and Members of the House of Representatives are “elected.”1 See 2 U. S. C. §7 (setting that date as “the day for the election” of Members of the House of Representatives); §1 (United States Senators “shall be elected” on that same date). Similarly, federal law has long provided that the “electors of President and Vice President shall be appointed” on that date as well. 3 U. S. C. §1.2 And because the appointment of electors in each State is now decided by popular vote, voters express their preferences for President on that same date. —————— 1 See 17 Stat. 28 (Representatives); 38 Stat. 384 (Senators). 2 See 5 Stat. 721.