U.S. Supreme Courtroom
SCOTUS will take into account whether or not Illinois congressman has standing to problem ballot-counting legislation
Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Bost of Illinois leaves a gathering of the Home Republican Convention on the Capitol Hill Membership in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 4, 2024. (Picture by Tom Williams/CQ Roll Name by way of the Related Press)
A downstate Illinois congressman who needs to problem a state legislation on the counting of mail-in ballots can have his case heard by the U.S. Supreme Courtroom.
The Supreme Courtroom agreed Monday to think about whether or not Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Bost of Illinois and two Republican electors have standing to problem the legislation. The statute permits the counting of absentee ballots obtained as much as 14 days after an election; if the ballots are postmarked on or earlier than Election Day; or if they’re signed, dated and authorized in the identical timeframe.
Illinois is one among 18 states that permit the counting of mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day, Politico experiences, citing data from the Nationwide Convention of State Legislatures, a nonpartisan public officers’ affiliation.
Bost and the 2 electors declare that the legislation dilutes the worth of lawfully forged votes, infringing the correct to vote and their proper to run for workplace below the First Modification and the 14th Modification. In addition they declare a violation of their statutory rights.
Along with Politico, publications protecting the cert grant embody Bloomberg Law, SCOTUSblog, Law360 and the Chicago Tribune.
The seventh U.S. Circuit Courtroom of Appeals at Chicago affirmed dismissal of the case, ruling that the plaintiffs did not plead an satisfactory harm the truth is that may give them standing to sue below Article III of the Structure.
The difficulty of candidate standing flared within the “hothouse ambiance surrounding the 2020 federal elections,” in keeping with the cert petition filed for Bost and the electors. Lots of the circumstances took an unjustifiably strict view of standing, a part of a current development, the cert petition says. The seventh Circuit choice is a part of the development, in keeping with the plaintiffs.
“The power of candidates and events to sue over state legal guidelines affecting their campaigns has been narrowed once more and, certainly, could by no means have been so restricted,” the petition says.
Bost and the electors argued that the coverage brought about financial hurt as a result of they have been pressured to make use of sources to contest ballots arriving after Election Day and to watch the late vote depend.
However the seventh Circuit stated there was no impending harm. Bost, for instance, received his final election with 75% of the vote, the seventh Circuit stated.
“And plaintiffs can’t manufacture standing by selecting to spend cash to mitigate such conjectural dangers” as an election defeat, the appeals courtroom stated.
The cert petition claims that the seventh Circuit’s choice “is contaminated with plenty of errors,” and the Supreme Courtroom’s steerage “is urgently wanted.”
The case is Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections.
Bost is represented by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group.
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
