The Supreme Court has revived a lawsuit challenging state laws that allow mail-in ballots to be counted after Election Day, potentially affecting how 16 states and several U.S. territories handle late-arriving votes.
The case centers on an Illinois law that permits ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received up to two weeks afterward. Republican congressman Mike Bost filed the original lawsuit, arguing that this practice unconstitutionally extends the election period. The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 to allow his case to proceed, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the majority opinion.
Roberts stated that political candidates have a legitimate interest in challenging voting rules that govern their elections. "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," he wrote. He further noted that this interest extends to "the integrity of the election and the democratic process."
Two liberal justices dissented. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, argued that candidates should face the same legal standards as other plaintiffs before bringing lawsuits. Jackson warned that creating special rules for candidates could destabilize both election law and electoral processes nationwide.
The case previously failed in lower courts, which determined that Bost had not suffered sufficient injury to sue. His legal team appealed, arguing that the costs of maintaining campaign operations beyond Election Day constitute financial harm.
The practical implications are significant. Sixteen states, along with Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Washington D.C., currently accept ballots that arrive after Election Day if properly postmarked. Four states that mail ballots to all voters—Washington, Oregon, California, and Nevada—also count these late arrivals.
The case has become a focal point in Republican efforts to challenge mail-in voting procedures. The lawsuit aligns with broader conservative criticism of mail-in ballot policies, which has been a central component of recent political discourse. President Trump issued an executive order in March directing the attorney general to take action against states that count ballots received after Election Day.
Civil rights organizations including the Brennan Center, American Civil Liberties Union, and League of Women Voters have already filed lawsuits challenging the executive order.
Oral arguments in October focused narrowly on whether a federal candidate has standing to challenge the law, rather than on the constitutionality of mail-in ballot grace periods themselves. The justices questioned whether candidates should be treated as direct targets of election regulations and whether the likelihood of mail-in ballots affecting an election outcome should determine standing.
The Supreme Court's decision allows the Illinois case to proceed to the merits phase, where justices will eventually address whether the practice itself violates the Constitution.