In a major win for lawmakers, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that candidates have the right to challenge election laws, which could open the doors for a potential flood of lawsuits ahead of this year’s midterm elections.
Republicans have called for sweeping election reform, particularly since 2020 when President Donald Trump lost reelection and insisted it was stolen from him. Specifically, he has argued without evidence that mail-in voting is rife with fraud.
Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision has effectively made it easier for elected officials to sue over voting laws they disagree with.
“I hope it sends a clear message to the lower level judges to not” dismiss similar challenges, Rep. Mike Bost of Illinois, who led the lawsuit the court ruled on, told NOTUS.
In 2022, Bost sued the Illinois State Board of Elections, challenging a law that allowed the counting of mail-in ballots that arrived after Election Day. Lower federal courts initially dismissed the lawsuit, arguing that because Bost won his election with 75% of the vote, he lacked standing to bring the case.
But on Tuesday, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a 7-2 decision that Bost had a right to sue because “he is a candidate for office. And a candidate has a personal stake in the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election.”
“Candidates have a concrete and particularized interest in the rules that govern the counting of votes in their elections, regardless whether those rules harm their electoral prospects or increase the cost of their campaigns,” Roberts wrote.
Bost said he feels confident that judges will rule in his favor moving forward.
“This will make sure that when you have these lawsuits, you do have standing,” he said. “The Constitution is clear that there is an Election Day. Now that doesn’t mean you can’t early vote, but voting stops on Election Day.”
Rep. Mike Kelly, a Republican from Pennsylvania who led a challenge to his state’s mail-in ballot laws that was ultimately dismissed, told NOTUS there’s more interest now in challenging voting laws than when he first did so in 2020.
Kelly added that the outcome “sets the stage” for more people to challenge mail-in ballots.
In her dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by a fellow liberal, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, warned that by giving candidates the right to challenge voting laws, the Supreme Court “now complicates and destabilizes both our standing law and America’s electoral processes.”
“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,” Jackson wrote.
“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,” Jackson continued. “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.”
Roberts disagreed with Jackson’s assessment, writing in a footnote that he did not believe candidates would “waste their resources” making such challenges.
Republicans suggested candidates would be ready to do so.
Joe Gruters, the chair of the Republican National Committee, which supported Bost’s lawsuit, called the decision a “major win for election integrity and basic accountability.”
“Today, the Court confirmed candidates can challenge unlawful election procedures in their own races,” Gruters continued.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee, which also supported the lawsuit, echoed that statement.
“We are pleased the Court agreed that candidates have a role in ensuring state election laws are consistent with federal law,” the NRSC’s general counsel, Blake Murphy, said in a statement to NOTUS.
Tom Fitton, the president of the conservative group Judicial Watch, which represented Bost in the case, said in a statement that the Supreme Court’s decision was “the most important Supreme Court election law ruling in a generation.”
“Too many courts have denied candidates the standing to challenge unlawful election rules such as the outrageous ballots that arrive after Election Day,” Fitton added. “American citizens concerned about election integrity should celebrate this Supreme Court victory.”
Judicial Watch has another case in the lower courts, brought by Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, that is challenging California’s law allowing mail-in ballots to arrive after Election Day. The case was put on hold pending an outcome in Bost’s case because the defendant in Issa’s case, California’s secretary of state, argued the California Republican lacked standing. The Supreme Court ruling in Bost’s case will likely green-light Issa’s challenge to move forward.
Democrats immediately denounced the decision.
“We’re assuming that Republicans are going to do everything possible to prevent a free and fair election from taking place in November 2026,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said when asked by NOTUS if he expects to see a flurry of legal challenges ahead of the midterms.
The court’s decision allowed Bost’s case to continue in the lower courts, but did not decide on the merits of his challenge to Illinois’ mail-in ballot laws. However, the justices will consider a lawsuit targeting Mississippi’s mail-in ballot laws later this term that could trigger more limitations on voting.
This story was produced as part of a partnership between NOTUS — a publication from the nonpartisan Allbritton Journalism Institute — and NEWSWELL, home of Times of San Diego, Santa Barbara News-Press and Stocktonia.
Hence then, the article about supreme court opens path for challenges to voting laws what that means for rep issa s mail in ballot case was published today ( ) and is available on Times of San Diego ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Supreme Court opens path for challenges to voting laws. What that means for Rep. Issa’s mail-in ballot case )
Also on site :