The Supreme Court opened the floodgates on Wednesday for candidates to file preelection lawsuits challenging election laws, finding political candidates have the standing to start those legal battles.

The high court ruled 7-2 in favor of Rep. Michael Bost (R-IL), deciding that Bost has proper standing, as a federal candidate for office, to sue Illinois over its election laws. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh.

“Under Article III of the Constitution, plaintiffs must have a ‘personal stake’ in a case to have standing to sue,” Roberts wrote. “Congressman Bost has an obvious answer: He is a candidate for office. And a candidate has a personal stake in the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett filed a concurring opinion, which was joined by Justice Elena Kagan, while Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote the dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

The ruling focused on a lawsuit that Bost and other GOP candidates brought against Illinois over its late-arriving mail ballot law. Lower federal courts found the candidates lacked standing to sue the state, a ruling that has now been reversed by the high court, reviving the legal challenge.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Bost v. Illinois Board of Elections is expected to open the floodgates for candidates’ lawsuits against state election procedures, establishing clear standing for those candidates prior to the time immediately before Election Day. The ruling is likely to increase the number of lawsuits filed ahead of elections.

The high court is set to hear arguments in Watson v. Republican National Committee, a case challenging Mississippi’s late-arriving mail ballot law, later this term.