meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments

Watson v. Republican National Committee

U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments

Oyez

Government & Organizations, National

4.7661 Ratings

🗓️ 23 March 2026

⏱️ 128 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

A case in which the Court will decide whether the federal election-day statutes, 2 U.S.C. § 7, 2 U.S.C. § 1, and 3 U.S.C. § 1, preempt a state law that allows ballots that are cast by federal election day to be received by election officials after that day.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

We will hear argument this morning in case 24-1260 Watson v. Republican National Committee.

0:06.8

Mr. Stewart.

0:10.7

Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court, states have broad power over elections.

0:16.0

Throughout our history, they've used that power to change how they hold elections.

0:20.4

Nowhere is that change more apparent than in Election Day itself.

0:23.6

Congress set the Federal Election Day in 1845.

0:26.6

At the time, everyone voted in person.

0:29.6

There was no absentee voting. There was no secret ballot.

0:32.6

Voters challenged each other's qualifications at the polls on Election Day, and States

0:38.2

received ballots on Election Day. Over time, states changed all those practices.

0:43.9

They did so as Congress extended Election Day to all federal offices. They've done so

0:48.0

ever since. No one claims that in setting the Federal Election Day, Congress blocked most

0:53.0

of those changes.

0:59.2

The dispute is whether Congress blocked just one change, allowing ballots cast by election day to be received after that day.

1:02.5

States have allowed that for over a century.

1:04.8

Congress has respected it.

1:06.4

No one challenged it until now.

1:08.5

The question is whether Congress in 1845 blocked that practice.

1:13.0

The answer is no. The election day statutes adopt a simple rule. States must make a final choice

1:19.0

of officers by Election Day. That is the plain meaning of an election. As this Court said in

1:24.6

United States v. Classic, from time immemorial, an election to public

1:28.7

office has been in point of substance no more and no less than the expression by qualified

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Oyez, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Oyez and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.