Disability Voting News: January 14, 2026

Sarah Blahovec

Sarah Blahovec

— 5 min read
The Accessible Voting Booth: Disability Voting News: January 14, 2026

Welcome back to The Accessible Voting Booth! I would say “happy 2026,” but I can’t call 2026 happy so far, politically speaking. Let’s dive into what’s been happening with voting since December. 

Postmark changes threaten mail-in ballot acceptance. 

The biggest piece of voting news from the past month impacting people with disabilities is the U.S. Postal Service’s new rule, which took effect on December 24th, which says that mail may not receive a postmark on the same day the USPS receives that mail. This impacts voters in 14 states and Washington, D.C., places which count ballots if they are postmarked on or before Election Day. The period after Election Day when they accept ballots postmarked by Election Day is called a grace period. The new USPS rule states that “the postmark date does not necessarily indicate the first day that the Postal Service had possession of the mailpiece.” 

This is not the only procedural change with the postal service that has impacted voters. Thanks to another procedural change, “mail dropped off at post offices and mail collection boxes more than 50 miles from a U.S. Postal Service Regional hub is collected the next day, instead of the same day.” The California Secretary of State and Attorney General publicized this change ahead of the November 4 Special Election, encouraging California voters to mail their ballots early. Still, 72,000 ballots were rejected for not being received on time in California.

Some states are also moving to eliminate grace periods for receipt of postmarked absentee ballots. On December 19, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed into law Senate Bill 293, which moves the ballot return deadline to the close of polls on Election Day. Previously, mail ballots were required to be postmarked by Election Day and were counted if they were received by the county board of elections by the fourth day after the election. Ohioans have expressed their frustration with how this change impacts voters with disabilities and elderly voters. In a letter to the editor of Cleveland.com, resident Elizabeth Brassell stated that “in signing this bill into law, DeWine failed to protect: the voting rights of Ohioans, especially those of us who rely on mail voting to participate in our democracy.” She explains:

“Senate Bill 293, which Gov. Mike DeWine recently signed into law, means valid votes in Ohio will be discarded. Under prior state law, absentee ballots that were properly completed and postmarked on time were counted if they arrived within four days after Election Day. This did not extend the time to vote; it simply accounts for mail delivery delays outside a voter’s control."
Senate Bill 293 removes this safeguard for nearly all Ohio voters. Under this bill, legally cast ballots mailed on time would be discarded solely because of postal delays. That is not election integrity; it is voter suppression.

Unfortunately, we still have more challenges to postmarked ballots: in November, the U.S Supreme Court agreed to hear Watson v. Republican National Committee, in which the Mississippi Republican Party, Republican National Committee, and two Mississippi voters are challenging Mississippi’s law which allows election officials to count mail ballots postmarked by Election Day and received within five business days after the election. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal law established a “single Election Day,” meaning that all ballots must be received by election officials on Election Day, instead of postmarked and received in a grace period. However, the state of Mississippi has appealed. The Supreme Court could decide to uphold the decision, which would eliminate grace periods nationwide and require ballots to be received by election officials on Election Day.

South Dakota introduces bill to eliminate electronic ballot marking devices. 

Following along with Trump’s attacks on voting technology, South Dakota Republicans have introduced Senate Bill 66, which states:

“The State Board of Elections may not authorize the use of any automatic tabulating equipment or electronic ballot marking system. The governing body of a political subdivision having supervision of an election may not adopt, implement, or use any automatic tabulating or electronic ballot marking system in an election.”

This bill would require hand counts of elections (read The Brennan Center’s reasoning for why this is problematic here), and for voters with disabilities, it would entirely eliminate accessible voting equipment, and it would contravene the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002, which mandates that every precinct have at least one voting system accessible to voters with disabilities. 

If passed, I would hope that voting rights and disability rights organizations would immediately challenge this legislation as a violation of federal law and the civil rights of voters with disabilities. Handmarked paper ballots are not accessible for voters who are blind or have low vision, or voters who have mobility disabilities that make it difficult or impossible to independently mark and handle a paper ballot. Additionally, accessible voting equipment assists voters with learning disabilities and voters with low literacy. There are many reasons voters may choose to vote on a ballot-marking device, and their right to use accessible voting machines must be protected. 

Rhode Island introduces a bill to permanently allow disabled voters to cast and return their ballots electronically. 

On November 7th, H7007 was introduced with several provisions impacting electronic voting for overseas voters, military voters, and voters with disabilities. Notably, it extends the provision allowing electronic ballot delivery and return for voters with disabilities past 2025, when it was set to expire. 

One interesting point on this is that the Rhode Island Secretary of State’s website extends electronic absentee voting to “voters with print disabilities or voters who are visually impaired.” However, the text of the legislation defines an eligible disabled voter as “a person with disabilities eligible to vote who is incapacitated to such an extent that it would be an undue hardship to vote at the polls because of illness, mental or physical disability, blindness, or a serious impairment of mobility.” This broader definition was apparently part of the law before and is noted as having expired December 31, 2025, but it looks like the Rhode Island Secretary of State’s website never updated its voter information page to include this definition of disability. For me, this calls into question how many voters who didn’t have a print disability were able to vote through electronic ballot delivery and return, since there seems to be conflicting information on the Secretary of State’s page. Hopefully if this bill is signed into law, the Secretary of State will update their voting information so that voters with disabilities (outside of print disabilities) know about this option. 

H7007 has additional provisions that would establish cybersecurity standards for remote absentee voting technology and require regular security reviews, which I see as a positive note to address concerns around the security of electronic ballot delivery and return (however, I don’t think this will placate those who believe that electronic ballot delivery and return can never be made completely secure). We’ll keep an eye on this legislation to see if it progresses.

Pre-filed bill would allow Alabamians with disabilities to receive absentee ballot help (via FOX 54).

Representative Adline Clarke pre-filed HB45, which would allow a disabled voter to receive assistance from a person of their choice with returning their absentee ballot. Currently, only a voter is allowed to return their ballot except in cases of “medical emergency absentee applications.” This is the third time Representative Clarke has filed this legislation and it comes after the passage of Alabama SB1 in 2024, which criminalizes some forms of ballot assistance, including any payment for assistance in absentee ballot applications or providing pre-filled information on absentee ballots. 

This law has become a particular problem for voters with disabilities who rely on paid home health aides, support staff, or voter assistance organizations to receive help with casting their ballot. On Representative Clarke’s previous two introductions of this legislation, the bill has not been considered in the legislature, and she hopes that pre-filing the legislation may give it a better shot of moving through the legislature. 

That's it for this week's edition of The Accessible Voting Booth! As always, if you’d like to support the newsletter and my work, here’s how:

Read more