* Background is here if you need it. The Hill…
The Supreme Court on Wednesday revived an Illinois Congress member’s lawsuit over a state mail-in ballot law, paving the way for political candidates nationwide to challenge election laws more easily in their states.
The justices ruled 7-2 that Rep. Mike Bost (R-Ill.) has the legal right to sue Illinois over its ability to count mail-in ballots received after Election Day, a practice targeted by President Trump and his allies.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion over the dissents of two of the court’s liberals: Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
* More from Crain’s…
The decision clears the way for Bost to press his claim that Illinois unlawfully allows mail ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted up to 14 days later, even as the court weighs a separate case that could ultimately resolve the underlying dispute. […]
Bost, from downstate Murphysboro, has argued the Illinois extended deadline is superseded by federal election law. But two lower courts ruled that the Bost and two presidential electors lacked legal standing to press their suit.
The 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago rejected Bost’s claims that the extended mail-in ballot count would require his campaign to spend more money on ballot monitoring and would threaten his electoral chances. The appeals court noted that Bost had won the 2022 election with 75 percent of the vote and thus any harm from the extended deadline was hypothetical. […]
One irony is that while the decision allows Bost to revive his suit, the Supreme Court has since taken up a separate case from Mississippi that directly involves the question of whether federal election statutes preempt a state law permitting mail-in ballots to be counted after Election Day. The decision in that case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, could settle the underlying issue raised in Bost’s suit.
* From Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion…
Candidates, in short, are not “mere bystanders” in their own elections. They have an obvious personal stake in how the result is determined and regarded. Departures from the preordained rules cause them particularized
and concrete harm. […]
Win or lose, candidates suffer when the process departs from the law. Thus, the long-shot and shoo-in alike would suffer harm if a State chose to conduct its election by, say, flipping a coin. The result of such an election would not reflect the will of the people, and the candidates would lose the opportunity to compete for the people’s support. So too, similar harms would result from less dramatic departures—for example, if a State decided to discard a random 10% of cast votes. Whether these decisions help, hurt, or have no effect on a candidate’s electoral prospects, they deprive the candidate of a fair process and an accurate result.
* Justice Katanji Brown Jackson’s dissenting opinion…
Alarmingly, today’s ruling also has far-reaching implications beyond Bost’s election, since dispensing with our usual standing requirements opens the floodgates to exactly the type of troubling election-related litigation the Court purportedly wants to avoid. For example, under the Court’s new harm-free candidate-standing rule, an electoral candidate who loses in a landslide can apparently still file a disruptive legal action in federal court after the election is over.
All he must do is assert that an election rule somehow deprived him of a fair process—even if that rule played no role in the election’s outcome or otherwise caused him harm. That possibility is especially concerning given the host of election-related regulations that States must promulgate when exercising their constitutional duty to set the “Times, Places, and Manner of holding Elections.” Art.
States regulate everything from a ballot’s chain of custody to its format—all of which the majority would permit candidates to challenge in court without offering any theory of how such rules harm them personally. It is impossible to square this outcome with the practical concerns the Court identifies. Ironically, then, it is the Court’s new and generous candidate-standing rule that invites late-breaking judicial intervention into the political process in a manner that is “as practically untenable as it is undemocratic.”
* Justice Robert’s rebuff…
We do not share the dissent’s concern that our recognition of this commonsense reality will “open[] the floodgates” to candidate-led challenges to ballot “format.” Indeed, the dissent itself suggests that courts already “ ‘often decide ballot-design cases,’ ” pointing to a case in which a court concluded that candidates did have standing to challenge ‘the form of election ballots.’ To the extent the dissent’s concern is that federal courts will be inundated with more trivial “format” challenges, post, at 12, to things like “ballot font and typeface,” it is neither clear why candidates would waste their resources in this way nor on what basis in federal law such suits could be brought. In any event, we address today only candidates’ standing to challenge rules that, like Illinois’s, govern the counting of votes in their elections.
…Adding… ILGOP Chair Kathy Salvi…
“Today, the United States Supreme Court agreed that Congressman Bost has the right to appeal Illinois’ disastrous mail-in voting laws,” said ILGOP Chair Kathy Salvi. “Illinoisans deserve to know their election results as early as possible and should not have to wait days, or even weeks, to know election results. It is imperative that Illinois leads with commonsense policies that strengthen and secure our election process.”
…Adding… US Rep. Mike Bost…
U.S. Rep. Mike Bost (IL-12) applauded the U.S. Supreme Court’s 7-2 decision today granting him standing in his lawsuit challenging an Illinois law that allows vote-by-mail ballots received up to 14 days after Election Day to be counted. Vote-by-mail ballots without postmarks can also currently be tabulated up to 14 days later if they are dated on or before Election Day.
“I’m thankful the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled strongly in our favor and concluded we have standing to challenge Illinois’ unconstitutional law allowing vote-by-mail ballots to be counted two weeks after Election Day,” said Bost. “This is a critically important step forward in the fight for election integrity and fair elections. I look forward to continuing to pursue this case as we navigate the next stages of the legal process. It’s vitally important that we restore the people’s trust in our elections.”
Bost is being represented by Judicial Watch, a conservative foundation that fights for accountability and integrity in law, politics and government.
“This is the most important Supreme Court election law ruling in a generation,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Too many courts have denied candidates the standing to challenge unlawful election rules such as the outrageous ballots that arrive after Election Day. American citizens concerned about election integrity should celebrate this Supreme Court victory. I thank Judicial Watch’s legion of supporters and our election law team that helped achieve this historic result.”
…Adding… Democratic Party of Illinois…
Illinois Democrats recognize Congressman Bost’s crusade for what it is: voter suppression. This isn’t about election integrity; it’s about seizing an opportunity to sow more doubt into our elections in a moment where MAGA threatens democracy on a daily basis. Most importantly, attacking mail-voting is attacking the farmer or the working mom who didn’t have time to make it to the polls, and the military voters who serve our nation overseas, but want their voices heard. These are the people Republicans are targeting.
- Anyone Remember - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 11:19 am:
Among other problems, this is anti-military.
- Steve - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 11:35 am:
Eventually , the Republicans will call for the post office to get out the business of ballots by mail. There are other products the postal service doesn’t deliver.
- Pundent - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 11:36 am:
Bost simply wants to sow doubt and discourse regarding the safety and validity of our elections. It’s the same strategy the GOP effectively adopted years ago to discredit the media. If it goes unchecked we could easily find ourselves in a position where elections are non-determinitive simply because a party doesn’t like the outcome.
- JB13 - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 11:48 am:
– we could easily find ourselves in a position where elections are non-determinitive simply because a party doesn’t like the outcome –
Roberts specifically addressed that concern. You would prefer a system in which courts overturn election results after the fact?
It is a good thing that specious standing rules can’t be used to prevent anyone from challenging counting rules that can be changed suddenly by one party to favor itself with no warning or debate.
Candidates should not have to lose before getting the right to sue to challenge the rules concerning how votes are counted. Either the rules are legal and constitutional or they are not. It shouldn’t matter if you win by 45 percent or 1 vote or not at all.
- Think again - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 11:49 am:
Bost now has standing - and his case is simple - a federal statute declares that there is an established election day, a court and a reasonable person could/should say that all ballots must be cast or arrive at the election authority by that legally established and advertised day. The state seems to be basing opposition to the Bost’s claims on the fact that ballots cast by mail may be delayed. Sort of silly.
- Think again - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 11:58 am:
=Bost is being represented by Judicial Watch=
Attorney Paul Clement is Bost’s Counsel of record and he not JW attorneys, led the oral argument at SCOTUS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTd_TZlbkts
- Pundent - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:13 pm:
Somebody needs to tell Kathy Salvi that knowing election results as early as possible is not an issue in Illinois. Heck I can tell her the results of the upcoming statewide elections right now.
- Amalia - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:28 pm:
Certainly don’t think the mail ballots coming in for a while is some nefarious plot. But it would be more clear for everyone involved if the entire process ended quicker.
- Norseman - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:35 pm:
For the Roberts Court, standing has been in the eye of the partisans. However, I’m not sure this ruling is bad. I DO think the underlying lawsuit is bogus and should be thrown out as meritless. I fear that appeal of the merits decision could run into the partisan attacks on fair elections.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:41 pm:
===ballots cast by mail may be delayed. Sort of silly===
Either you’ve never relied on the Postal Service or you’re being intentionally disingenuous.
- Just Swell - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:43 pm:
I think Justice Kagan joining the majority opinion says this wasn’t partisan. She has the most common sense approach on the Court.
Bost won. But also Kwame lost.
- Jerry - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:50 pm:
Agree that Salvy doesn’t understand the decision or case.
Another big government, nanny state decision from so-called Conservatives on the Court. Conservative used to mean “get the gubbamint out of my life!”
- City Zen - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:51 pm:
Folks, just get your mail-in ballots in. It’s really not hard. You already made up your mind. If you didn’t, make it up 1-2 weeks before election then send it in. Still procrastinating with a few days left and don’t trust USPO? Go to your nearest early voting center. It opened weeks ago and the friendly poll workers will greet you with a smile.
Plenty of opportunites to get your vote in before election day. Just do it.
- H-W - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:53 pm:
So Bost has the right to challenge.
That does not mean Bost won is argument against the way votes are counted. It only means he gets to go to court some more and make his case again.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 12:53 pm:
===It’s really not hard===
You’re talking about a country where millions of people wait until the last possible day to file their taxes.
Human beings tend to procrastinate.
- Dirty Red - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 1:19 pm:
= this is anti-military. =
All the more interesting for Bost, who Semper Fis whenever he can, to lead this effort.
The Congressman has also been more proactive about USPS delays since his district is heavily impacted by the outlandish hold ups in St. Louis distribution. Don’t get me wrong, he should be on THAT charge. However, he’s now going to file litigation wherein plaintiffs will have his work on the matter to counter his civil claims. He must be looking at some pretty dire mid-term numbers and blatantly illegal maneuvers if jeopardizing mail-in ballots from the narrowing Republican base is the best strategy.
Somebody do a wellness check on Batman, please.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 1:32 pm:
==Plenty of opportunites to get your vote in before election day==
What difference does it make unless your one of those crackpots who think that somehow counting a ballot after election day that was postmarked by election day is somehow fraud.
- here we go again - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 1:34 pm:
A win is a win but it’s just on very narrow grounds of whether he can be a party to a lawsuit which he’s very likely to lose when all is said and done, but for Bost a loss in the main underlying case doesn’t even matter because he’s in a district so Red anyone with an R by their name can coast to victory no matter how many weeks late some mail-in ballots turn up. But the IL GOP obviously will take any win, no matter how trivial and short lived.
- Anyone Remember - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 1:52 pm:
“Folks, just get your mail-in ballots in. It’s really not hard.”
Ever voted from overseas? Things can move slowly.
- btowntruthfromforgottonia - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 2:15 pm:
“Folks, just get your mail-in ballots in.”
Not that hard huh?
You must not have used the postal service lately.
I have had to file 4 seperate complaints against my local post office due to lost mail/misplaced mail/service issues.
One of the complaints was because a postmaster told me if I didn’t like how they were doing their jobs I could apply to become a mail carrier.
Got my auto insurance bill from last August last month.
They couldn’t find a letter that was mailed to me a week before Christmas…..until I filed another complaint with the District Office ….the letter magically appeared in my mailbox today 2 days after I filed the complaint.
So don’t say “it’s really not hard.”
- btowntruthfromforgottonia - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 2:18 pm:
City Zen:
Where are these friendly poll workers you describe?
They don’t exist in my part of Forgottonia.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 2:18 pm:
=“Folks, just get your mail-in ballots in. It’s really not hard.”
Ever voted from overseas? Things can move slowly.=
I would also add…Ever been deployed? Sometimes you don’t get your mail in a timely manner. But what the heck, why should we worry about the votes of our soldiers right?
- Dirty Red - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 2:33 pm:
= “This is the most important Supreme Court election law ruling in a generation,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. =
OK, literal writer of your own press release.
Counter-point: Citizens United and Bush v. Gore were not only more impactful, they also established case law - not just the OK to bring suit.
- Teacher Lady - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 2:42 pm:
A ballot postmarked by Election Day needs to be acknowledged as a vote cast by Election Day. You marked your ballot and mailed it by the deadline. The speed of delivery is not in your control.
Some people use mail-in ballots because they are not able to get themselves to an early voting location or a poll on Election Day.
They should not be disenfranchised because of that.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 2:57 pm:
===A ballot postmarked by Election Day needs to be acknowledged as a vote cast by Election Day===
Agreed. I’m curious how many people who insist that ballots must be received by election day have sent in their tax returns on April 15.
- Annon'in - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 3:20 pm:
Funny to see Local Control GOPies getting SCOTUS to help them harm mail in vote.
- Think again - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 3:20 pm:
===A ballot postmarked by Election Day needs to be acknowledged as a vote cast by Election Day===
A majority of states ( 35, both red and blue) require ballots to be received on or before election day
https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/table-11-receipt-and-postmark-deadlines-for-absentee-mail-ballots
- Remember the Alamo II - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 3:29 pm:
=== A ballot postmarked by Election Day needs to be acknowledged as a vote cast by Election Day ===
But you need to know that USPS is changing the way they consider things to be postmarked. No longer can you just stick it in the mailbox and call it a day. Mail is no longer considered postmarked until it gets to a regional distribution center, which most people do not know.
These are intentional attempts by the Trump Administration to disenfranchise voters. People need to be made aware of the changes, but I wouldn’t trust USPS with my ballot. If you can, vote in person or use a ballot drop box if you cannot vote in person.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 3:51 pm:
===A majority of states===
From your own link, most of the largest states require a postmark before or on election day, Texas being one.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 4:00 pm:
==require ballots to be received on or before election day==
Nobody has yet articulated what the big deal is about allowing a ballot postmarked by election day to be counted after.
- Think again - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 4:09 pm:
= Mail is no longer considered postmarked until it gets to a regional distribution center, which most people do not know=
You can also request a manual postmark at any Post Office - they may call it hand stamping or local postmarking - but they will be glad to help
https://www.aarp.org/government-elections/usps-postmark-changes/
- low level - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 4:40 pm:
Mike Bost wants to male it harder for our military men and women to vote. Thats good to know.
- Pundent - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 4:44 pm:
=Nobody has yet articulated what the big deal is about allowing a ballot postmarked by election day to be counted after.=
Nor will they. It’s simply an attempt to infer something nefarious absent any specific evidence. It’s brought to you by the party of alternative facts.
- Socially DIstant Watcher - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 4:55 pm:
==Folks, just get your mail-in ballots in. It’s really not hard.==
Which is why most campaigns stop advertising a week before election day: most prudent voters have already put their ballots in the mail by then. Nobody waits until the last day; no one has last minute emergencies; that never happens. /s
- btowntruthfromforgottonia - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 5:01 pm:
“friendly poll workers will greet you with a smile.”
That would be a first for me in this section of forgottonia in 25 years of voting.
I think they get told to scowl,especially for me.
Some people might want the mail-in ballot so they don’t have to deal with that.
- H-W - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 5:46 pm:
@ btowntruthfromforgottonia
In our forgottonia precinct, my wife and I often walk in a say out loud, ” the democrats are here.” That often gets a smile. But to be honest, our precinct workers are very nice and pleasant neighbors.
- Steve - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 5:49 pm:
-Nobody has yet articulated what the big deal is about allowing a ballot postmarked by election day to be counted after-
Election day isn’t supposed to be election season. No reason results can’t be know in a timely manner. Other countries and other states don’t have this problem.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 6:34 pm:
=Other countries and other states don’t have this problem=
Do you have any examples?
- Just Me 2 - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 6:58 pm:
I read all the over the top statements. To me this is a question of whether Bost has the ability to file a suit and get it before a court. It is not a question of his ability to be successful.
- Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Jan 14, 26 @ 7:12 pm:
==Other countries and other states don’t have this problem. ==
Neither does Illinois. This is a made-up problem. Waiting a week or two does not change the results, it simply means we have to be patient and allow the ballots mailed in prior to Election Day to be counted.
It became a “problem” when Trump decided it was a “problem.” He decided that because he found out liberals were a bit more likely to vote by mail and a vote for anyone other than Trump is not a legitimate vote.
- TinyDancer(FKASue) - Thursday, Jan 15, 26 @ 11:41 am:
Voters should not be penalized for a failure of the post office to do its job.
And the post office should not be incentivized to delay ballots for political reasons.