Legal Catch-22 in PA?

There's a particular topic in a recent appeal in the state of PA that interests me:

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=5482

Quote:

Even more persuasively, the plaintiffs point out that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has also held that plaintiffs don't have standing to challenge an election law until after the election, meaning that the court effectively put them in a Catch-22: before the election, they lacked standing; after the election, they've delayed too long. The result of the court's gamesmanship is that a facially unconstitutional election law can never be judicially challenged.

I'm looking to untangle this because I feel strongly that lawsuits about the rules of an election should occur before the election and I'm getting hit back with this.

via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/37qB25H