SCOTUS Takes Case Challenging the Validity of Mail Ballots that Arrive Past Election Day
Educate. Advocate. Mitigate. Activate!
The Supreme Court said Monday it would take an Illinois case challenging the validity of mail ballots that arrive past Election Day.
The case is an appeal from Judicial Watch (JW) on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost (R-IL) and two presidential electors, challenging an Illinois law that allows mail-in ballots to be counted up to 14 days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked or certified by Election Day.
16 states, including Washington State and D.C., have laws that allow ballots to be received and counted after Election Day if postmarked on or before Election Day.
The case, initially filed in May 2022, argues that the law violates federal law by establishing a single national Election Day, thereby undermining voter confidence and allowing for potential fraud.
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals previously dismissed the case, ruling that Bost and the other plaintiffs lacked standing, as they did not demonstrate an injury.
Federal law defines Election Day as the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year. The JW complaint says: Despite Congress’ clear statement regarding a single national Election Day, Illinois has expanded Election Day by extending by 14 days the date for receipt and counting of vote-by-mail ballots.
JW is saying: It is an injustice that the courts would deny a federal candidate the ability to challenge an election provision that could lead to illegal votes being cast and counted for two weeks AFTER Election Day. The Supreme Court’s decision to hear this case is a critical opportunity to uphold federal law, protect voter rights, and ensure election integrity. Illinois’ 14-day extension of Election Day thwarts federal law, violates the civil rights of voters and invites fraud.
In the petition to SCOTUS, JW stated:
For over 130 years, this Court has heard claims brought by federal candidates challenging state time, place, or manner regulations affecting their federal elections. Until recently, it was axiomatic that candidates had standing to challenge these regulations. Indeed, “it’s hard to imagine anyone who has a more particularized injury than the candidate has.” … That is because a candidate who pours money and sweat into a campaign, who spends time away from her job and family to traverse the campaign trail, and who puts her name on a ballot has an undeniably different— and more particularized—interest…
SCOTUS will focus on whether Bost, as a candidate, has legal standing to challenge the state’s election law. Arguments are expected to start in October 2025. A favorable ruling for Bost could require lower courts to reconsider the merits of mail-in voting laws.
Bost said, "With the American people's confidence in our elections at a discouraging low point, it's more important than ever we work to restore their trust. I believe a big part of that effort is ensuring all votes are tallied by Election Day, not days or weeks later. I am thankful the Supreme Court has agreed to hear my appeal of Illinois' election law."
OF NOTE: JW was victorious in a related election case decided Oct. 25, 2024, where the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Ruled Unanimously: In that case, Judge Oldham wrote, Federal law requires voters to take timely steps to vote by Election Day, and Federal law does not permit the State of Mississippi to extend the period for voting by 1 day, 5 days, or 100 days. The date elections officials receive the ballot is all that matters. The date of mailing and postmark are irrelevant. If a ballot hasn’t been received by election day, it’s too late.
In March 2025, the Fifth Circuit declined to rehear its previous ruling, in which it agreed with JW that it was unlawful for Mississippi to count ballots that arrived after Election Day.
A huge thank you to JW, who is leading the way with Election Integrity litigation:
In March 2025, JW filed a federal lawsuit against California on behalf of U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 7 days beyond the date established by federal law. CA counts ballots received up to 7 days after Election Day.
In May 2024, JW sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of CA, similarly asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort” to remove ineligible registrants from the rolls as required by federal law.
In Oct. 2024, JW filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Constitution Party of Oregon and two lawfully registered voters of Umatilla County and Marion County, OR, against OR Secretary of State Lavonne Griffin-Valade and the State of OR, to make “a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters” from the voter rolls as required by the NVRA. Also, yesterday, the DOJ filed a Statement of Interest in the JW case.
Thanks to JW, in February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since the previous year, under the terms of a settlement agreement reached in a federal lawsuit filed by JW in 2017. Legal pressure from JW led to the removal of up to 4 million ineligible voters from voter rolls in New York, California, Pennsylvania, Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio, and elsewhere (in 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such voter roll removals are mandatory).
Recently, the WAGOP lost a State Superior Court case filed against Clark County auditor, Greg Kimsey, for not cleaning up the Clark County voter rolls prior to ballots being mailed for the 2024 Nov 5th general election. Plaintiffs asserted that Kimsey ignored the National Change of Address reports he regularly receives and did not update the voter rolls in a timely manner.
In that Legislative District 18 State Senate race, Republican candidate Benton lost by 172 votes with 84,123 votes cast to Democrat challenger Cortes.
On May 8, 2025, an Inslee Appointee Judge, Camara Banfield, ruled against the plaintiffs, saying they did not prove their argument of negligence as applied to the statutes in question and the action of Kimsey.
The ruling sets a terrible and very dangerous precedent that county auditors are under no legal obligation to remove voters from the voter rolls who have previously reported a change of residence - or for auditors to even update their voter registrations before an election. There may be an appeal…
A few weeks ago, the WAGOP, led by Chairman Jim Walsh, filed Initiative Measure No. IL23-126, a WA State citizen-led effort to require Voter ID and Proof of Citizenship to Vote. A KOMO News poll shows WA voters overwhelmingly support proof of citizenship to vote by well over 85%!
For daily Election Integrity updates including articles, videos, posts and links, see: SkagitRepublicans.com/ElectionIntegrity
Bill Bruch
Bill Bruch is the WA State GOP Election Integrity Committee Chairman (5th year), WAGOP Executive Board Member (5th Year), Skagit County GOP Chairman (9th year), Citizen Journalist, Blogger, Business Owner, 2020 WA State House Representative Candidate, Former Council Member, and WA State 2016 and 2024 RNC National Convention Delegate.