A federal court in South Carolina ruled that the state’s rules for mail-in-voting violated the constitution last week.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling relates to South Carolina’s mail-in ballot laws and certain allowances it makes for voters over the age of 65.

Typically, voters looking to send mail-in ballots must meet certain criteria, such as being out of the country during the early voting period or being disabled.

A state law removed those requirements for all voters over the age of 65, however, and the fourth circuit’s ruling found that provision to be unconstitutional.

“By granting voters aged sixty-five and older unconditional access to absentee-by-mail voting while conditioning that same option for younger voters on eligibility categories, documentation, and a rigid deadline, the state allocates voting opportunities unequally based solely on age,” U.S. Circuit Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote in the order.

The case arose after a group of younger voters sued the South Carolina Elections Commission in 2023, arguing the rule violated the 26th Amendment.

A lower court initially dismissed their argument, but the case continued on appeal until it appeared before the Fourth Circuit.

The new ruling sends the case back to lower courts with specific instructions on how to decide the case. Gregory wrote that either all South Carolina voters must be entitled to vote absentee without restrictions, or none of them can be.

That is unlikely to be the end of the question, however, as representatives of South Carolina say they plan to appeal further, potentially reaching the Supreme Court.

The order came the same week that the US Supreme Court issued a largely favorable ruling for President Donald Trump’s effort to limit mail-in ballots across the country.

Former White House deputy counsel Gene Hamilton said federal agencies such as the Postal Service can now move forward with parts of Trump’s election-integrity order, including new ballot-mail standards and efforts involving state citizenship lists, as opposing states wait to see which concrete federal actions could form the basis of new lawsuits.

Further litigation is expected on that front as well.