Get the app
Ms. Oates
Government counsel appearing in opposition to broad candidate-standing theories, arguing that ordinary Article III standing rules should apply and that the record here fails to show a substantial risk of cognizable harm.
Best podcasts with Ms. Oates
Ranked by the Snipd community
Oct 8, 2025
• 1h 44min
Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections
chevron_right
Mr. Clement, an experienced appellate litigator, represents the petitioners arguing that federal candidates should have standing to challenge state election laws impacting mail-in ballots. He discusses how extended counting periods lead to vote dilution and increased campaign costs. Mr. Talent defends a narrower view of standing, suggesting it should only apply when ballots could genuinely affect outcomes. Meanwhile, Ms. Oates argues for traditional standing rules, critiquing claims of speculative harm. The debate raises questions about candidate rights and practical implications for electoral integrity.
The AI-powered Podcast Player
Save insights by tapping your headphones, chat with episodes, discover the best highlights - and more!
Get the app