Change

The post you're referring to from the account "Taking Back America" (posted about 4 hours ago as of your query) shares a dramatic headline: a **7-2 Supreme Court ruling** on mail-in ballots that supposedly marks a major shift for the **2028 election**.

This refers to a real U.S. Supreme Court decision issued on **January 14, 2026**, in the case involving Illinois Republican Rep. **Mike Bost** (and others) challenging the state's law on late-arriving mail-in ballots.

### What the Ruling Actually Did

The Supreme Court ruled **7-2** that candidates for federal office (like members of Congress) have **legal standing** to challenge state election laws governing how votes are counted — even if they won their election and can't prove the rule directly changed the outcome.

- Illinois law allows mail-in/absentee ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received up to about **14 days** later (during the provisional ballot counting window).

- Bost argued this violates federal statutes setting a uniform "Election Day" for federal elections.

- Lower courts dismissed the case, saying Bost lacked standing (no concrete injury since he won).

- The Supreme Court reversed that, saying candidates have a direct personal stake in the rules for counting votes in their own elections. Chief Justice **John Roberts** wrote the majority opinion.

- The two dissenters were Justices **Sonia Sotomayor** and **Ketanji Brown Jackson**, who warned it could open the floodgates to more election litigation and destabilize the process.

Importantly:  

This ruling **does not** ban or restrict mail-in ballots nationwide. It doesn't declare late-arriving ballots unconstitutional. It only revives Bost's lawsuit and sends it back to lower courts to decide the merits. It makes it easier for candidates to bring similar challenges in the future.

### Connection to 2028 (and Broader Context)

The post exaggerates this as a game-changer for **2028** (the next presidential election). Some conservative outlets and commentators frame it that way because:

- It could encourage more lawsuits against "grace periods" for late mail ballots in various states.

- A separate pending case (e.g., involving Mississippi's 5-day grace period) might address the substantive issue of whether such laws conflict with federal "Election Day" rules — potentially with bigger implications if decided similarly.

- Broader Republican efforts (including executive actions) have targeted extended counting windows, often citing concerns over election integrity and confidence.

However, mainstream reports emphasize this is procedural (about who can sue), not a direct ban or overhaul. It won't automatically stop mail-in voting or late counts in 2026 midterms or 2028. Many states have long allowed grace periods for practical reasons (e.g., mail delays, especially in rural or overseas/military voting).

The image in the post (stacks of ballots + a photo likely of Justice Clarence Thomas or another figure) is typical sensational framing from partisan accounts, but it doesn't reflect new evidence of fraud or a sweeping invalidation.

If you're seeing claims of this "ending mail-in ballots" or proving widespread cheating, those go beyond what the ruling actually says. It's more about opening courthouse doors for challenges than resolving the underlying debate. For the full opinion or details, check official Supreme Court sources or neutral outlets like AP, PBS, or SCOTUSblog. Let me know if you want more on related cases!

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals