Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Supreme Court of the United States
Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections
Docket number: 24-568
Term: 2025
Court: United States Supreme Court
Important dates
Argued: October 8, 2025
Court membership
Chief Justice John RobertsClarence ThomasSamuel AlitoSonia SotomayorElena KaganNeil GorsuchBrett KavanaughAmy Coney BarrettKetanji Brown Jackson

Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections is a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on October 8, 2025, during the court's October 2025-2026 term.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The issue: The case concerns whether the petitioners had Article III standing to bring this case. Click here to learn more about the case's background.
  • The questions presented: "The sole question presented here is whether Petitioners, as federal candidates, have pleaded sufficient factual allegations to show Article III standing to challenge state time, place, and manner regulations concerning their federal elections."[1]
  • The outcome: The appeal is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • The case came on a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. To review the lower court's opinion, click here.

    Background

    Case summary

    The following are the parties to this case:[2]

    • Petitioner: Michael J. Bost, et al.
      • Legal counsel: Paul D. Clement (Clement & Murphy, PLLC), T. Russell Nobile (Judicial Watch, Inc.)
    • Respondent: Illinois State Board of Elections, et al.
      • Legal counsel: Jane Elinor Notz (Office of the Attorney General, State of Illinois), Alex Hemmer (Office of the Illinois Attorney General)

    The following summary of the case was published by Oyez

    Michael Bost, a multi-term U.S. Representative from Illinois’s 12th District, along with Laura Pollastrini and Susan Sweeney, political activists who served as presidential electors in 2020, challenged Illinois’s mail-in ballot receipt procedure. Under Illinois law, election officials can receive and count mail-in ballots for up to fourteen days after Election Day if the ballots are postmarked or certified by Election Day. Plaintiffs argued this procedure violates federal election statutes by impermissibly extending Election Day beyond the federally mandated date. They claimed the counting of these “untimely” ballots dilutes their votes and forces them to expend additional campaign resources to monitor ballot counting for two weeks after Election Day.

    Plaintiffs filed suit in May 2022 against the Illinois State Board of Elections and its Executive Director. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed the case, finding that Plaintiffs lacked Article III standing. The court also rejected their claims on the merits. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal on jurisdictional grounds.[3]

    To learn more about this case, see the following:

    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[1]

    Questions presented:
    The sole question presented here is whether Petitioners, as federal candidates, have pleaded sufficient factual allegations to show Article III standing to challenge state time, place, and manner regulations concerning their federal elections.[3]

    Oral argument

    Audio

    Audio of oral argument:[4]



    Transcript

    Transcript of oral argument:[5]

    Outcome

    The case is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.

    October term 2025-2026

    See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2025-2026

    The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 6, 2025. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions by mid-June.[6]

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes