Washington - The Supreme Court said Monday it will consider whether to restore the challenge of Republican congressmen to Illinois law that allows for the receipt and counting of mail-in ballots after Election Day.

The Supreme Court will hear the dispute involving Republican Rep. Michael Bost in its next term starting in October and a decision is expected to be made by the end of June 2026. The question in the case is a procedure: whether Bost and two Republican presidential electors have the legal right to challenge state regulations to challenge federal voters’ time, place and way.

If the High Court finds that the plaintiffs do have legal provisions to sue, their lawsuit can be carried out.

The case involves an Illinois law that determines when it is necessary to mail and receive a postage stamp to be counted. In 2005, changes in state law effectively allowed mail-in voting to be received within 14 days after Election Day, as long as it was cast by mail on or before Election Day. At least 17 states also allow counting of ballots that arrive after Election Day.

Bost was first elected to Congress in 2014, with two Republican presidential electors suing Illinois election officials for 2022 statistics mail voting. They partially argue that receipts and counts of late voting cut their voting value, by virtue of their infringement of their voting rights in the first and 14th competitions, and violated the 14th statistics, and occupied the competitor's campaign and the competition. Federal Election Day.

The federal district court dismissed the case in 2023, ruling that the BOST and the two voters did not claim that they had legal right to prosecute, a concept known as status. A split three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld the District Court's ruling last year, agreeing that the plaintiffs did not claim to be willing to file a lawsuit because they did not reasonably accuse them of harm from laws involving the post-sending mail ballots.

Bost and voters filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court, believing that in recent years, the ability of candidates and parties to file lawsuits against state laws that affect their campaigns is limited by federal courts.

"The guidance of the court is needed to correct the unfounded scope of the candidate's ability to challenge election regulations," they wrote in a filing with the Supreme Court.

"It is important that the courts listen and address the challenges of federal candidates to the states that influence their elections, where and how they are." "In addition to the interests of litigants, it is important that the public conclude that elections are conducted in an orderly and not arbitrary manner."

But Illinois election officials urged the Supreme Court to refuse the appeal, believing the plaintiffs did not agree to their decision to make a mail-in ballot on or before Election Day, but afterward.

"They did not claim that the Illinois voting receipt deadline affects the possibility of any race they have ever participated in or that they may compete in the future," state officials said in a document filed with the Superior Court. "Instead, petitioners believe that they have the right to challenge the deadlines solely on their status as candidates, that is, political candidates can always challenge the state's theory of regulation of the then, location and how the election is conducted."