Justice Alito dissented from a Supreme Court ruling upholding state laws that count mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day, arguing this violates the federal election-day statute. The author is criticizing Alito's reasoning as illogical—that the electorate's actual choice occurs when voters cast and mail their ballots, not when election officials count them. The core facts are verified: the Court did rule 5-4 to uphold the Mississippi ballot-counting law in Watson v. RNC, and Alito did advance this statutory argument in his dissent. What matters here is whether Alito's legal reasoning is sound—the author argues it conflates the timing of voting with the timing of ballot counting, but this is a legitimate policy disagreement about statutory interpretation, not demonstrably false reasoning.