gloss · the reading room

Bost v. Illinois Bd. of Elections · ¶63

Perhaps sensing the weakness of its novel, harm-free standing analysis, the Court resorts to policy arguments to bolster it. It worries that requiring candidates to establish that they might lose the election will “channel” lawsuits “to shortly before election day—or worse, after.” Ante, at 80. “Only then,” the Court says, will a candidate really know whether an election regulation has impacted his race. Ibid. And, worse still, a candidate trying to make such a showing could find himself in the “awkward” position of having to “plead and prove that voters who take advantage of the challenged rule will favor his rivals.” Ante, at 81–82.
Read in context ›

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.