Supreme Court Hands Down Major Victory for Voter Integrity, Upholds Candidates’ Right To Challenge Ballot-Counting Rules

The Supreme Court on Monday issued a landmark 7-2 decision affirming that candidates have the right to challenge laws that extend mail-in ballot counting beyond Election Day, delivering a significant win for election integrity advocates.

At the heart of the case was a challenge to an Illinois law that allows ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted up to 14 days later. Congressman Michael Bost, joined by two other candidates, filed suit arguing that the practice violates federal statutes that establish a single, unified Election Day across the country. Lower courts had dismissed their case on the grounds that the candidates lacked standing to sue — but the Supreme Court emphatically overturned that ruling.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts made clear that candidates are not powerless observers in the electoral process. He said they have a direct and personal stake in how elections are administered and therefore must be allowed to challenge laws they believe violate federal election statutes.

“A candidate is not a mere bystander,” Roberts wrote. “He or she devotes immense time and resources to seeking office, and has a fundamental interest in the legitimacy of the process that determines the outcome.”

The Court found that reputational harm — such as the loss of public confidence due to perceived election irregularities — is a real and actionable injury. The decision also struck down the idea that candidates must wait until after they lose, or come close to losing, before they can challenge election procedures. That approach, Roberts warned, would lead to chaos, with courts being forced to impose last-minute changes that confuse voters and threaten the integrity of the democratic process.

Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito joined Roberts in the majority, as did Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Kagan. The two dissenting justices were Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The ruling affirms that candidates may sue under Article III of the Constitution if they believe a state’s voting rules violate federal election law. Specifically, Bost and the other plaintiffs pointed to 2 U.S.C. §7 and 3 U.S.C. §1 — federal statutes that set the timeline for congressional and presidential elections as the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. The Illinois law’s 14-day ballot-counting extension, they argued, violates that standard.

While the Court did not strike down the Illinois law outright, the ruling allows the case to proceed on the merits — setting a powerful precedent that could impact how extended ballot-counting deadlines are handled nationwide.

Election integrity groups quickly praised the ruling. Many see it as a major turning point in restoring public trust in how elections are conducted and counted.

With this decision, the Court opened the door for more legal scrutiny of vote-counting procedures — especially those that extend past Election Day. The ruling could also reshape how state laws are challenged ahead of the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election.