Roberts Court to open the vote suppression floodgates

This is an ominous development indeed:

A majority of the Supreme Court appeared sympathetic on Wednesday to arguments by an Illinois congressman that political candidates should be able to challenge their states’ election laws.

During the approximately two-hour argument, the justices grappled with what political candidates, particularly those with nearly guaranteed success in an election, must show in order to bring a legal challenge to election rules.

The argument centered on a threshold question: What is the legal standard candidates must meet to prove they have been harmed by a rule?

If the court were to endorse an expansive definition for who can bring such challenges, it could clear the way for a flood of litigation against all sorts of state election rules, particularly from Republicans who have argued that the rules in some states favor Democrats.

The case is one of several lawsuits brought by allies of President Trump to question the guidelines around mail-in ballots, which he has long attacked and falsely blamed for his 2020 election loss as more people voted by mail during the pandemic.

The more challenges to state electoral systems this Supreme Court allows, the worse. And the “Purcell principle” will once again shown to be about as much a constraint on the Court helping Republicans as “major questions doctrine.”