[Principled]

Do feds have a say in how a state decides to do elections?

[Political Junkie Too]

In Bush v Gore in 2000, the federal court said that the states have to have "equal protection," meaning that they can't do things like having recounts in some counties but not others, have to have equivalent access to voting locations, etc.

-PJ

[Political Junkie Too]

One other thing that I've been suggesting is this:

The state court's oversight gets murky when federal Electoral College elections are comingled on the same ballot with state races.

The Constitution says that the legislatures say how to select Electors, which would take this one vote away from a state court's ability to change. However, the state court might have a say on the conduct of the other races on the same ballot.

I'm arguing that the state can keep the ballots coming for a week after the election for local races, but not for the Electoral College if the legislature didn't set it up that way.

Therefore, they need to either have a separate ballot for the Presidential election which is wholly under the jurisdiction of the legislature, or they say that any ballots received after election day will not have their Presidential vote counted.

-PJ

[vikingd00d]

>>Do feds have a say in how a state decides to do elections?

They did in 2000, when they ruled that states can NOT change the rules in the middle of an election. (Bush v Gore, iirc)