Pennsylvania’s mail ballot dating rules have been in flux for years. Here's what you need to know.

Pennsylvania voters in the May 19 primary face confusion over mail ballot dating rules, as courts have repeatedly overturned and reinstated requirements under Act 77. Currently, counties cannot reject ballots for missing or improper dates, though officials still recommend including one, with appeals pending in state and federal courts.
Pennsylvania voters preparing to cast mail ballots in the May 19 primary may struggle with conflicting rules on dating their return envelopes. Since Act 77, the law enabling no-excuse mail voting, took effect in 2020, courts have repeatedly reversed and reinstated the date requirement, leading to thousands of rejected ballots and voter confusion. The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruled in 2024 that rejecting ballots for missing or improper dates was unconstitutional, and a federal appeals court upheld that decision in August 2025, citing First Amendment violations. Despite these rulings, election officials continue to recommend voters date their envelopes, as both cases are under appeal. The current rule allows voters to use the current date on the envelope’s date line, just below the signature space, which must also be filled out. Writing birthdays or registration dates has been a common mistake in past elections. In 2023, the Pennsylvania Department of State prefilled the year on the envelope to reduce errors, which helped lower rejections in the 2024 primary. The dating requirement stems from Act 77’s 2019 language, which mandates voters ‘date and sign’ the return envelope’s declaration. This provision was carried over from older absentee voting laws, written before counties adopted digital ballot tracking systems. Critics, including Common Cause, the NAACP, and the ACLU, argue the rule serves no practical purpose and disenfranchises eligible voters, as the state’s tracking system already records ballot timeliness. Supporters counter that a written date could act as a backup verification if tracking systems fail. Legal challenges have intensified, with state and federal courts weighing the constitutionality of the requirement. In September 2025, a state court ruled again on the issue, and the U.S. Supreme Court has taken up the federal appeal. Until final decisions are made, voters face uncertainty, though current rulings prevent counties from rejecting ballots solely due to missing or improper dates.
This content was automatically generated and/or translated by AI. It may contain inaccuracies. Please refer to the original sources for verification.