It is an election for federal office so the federal govt can intervene.
The President is not a Federal officer.
Congress has Article I authority to “make rules” for elections for Representatives, and, since 1917, for Senators.
There is no such authority over the process by which State Legislatures, on their sovereign authority, appoint the President through 50 separate determinations.
It is an election for federal office so the federal govt can intervene.
Aren't you a teacher? Sounds like you need to take remedial Social Studies over the summer.
The United States is a constitutional republic. There are no "elections for federal office". The citizens of the several States vote for State Electors, and those Electors participate in the Electoral College. No one has ever cast a vote for president - they've voted for a representative in a Constitutionally established governing body with a limited scope.
All this wishcasting about "federal elections" sounds like some Daily Kos fantasy about "direct democracy". The entire point of a federal republican form of government is to preserve a conservative political environment in which governance is not subject to the whims of the mob.
"Direct democracy" is how you end up with travesties like the California Constitution. No thank you!
It really doesn’t even matter that interference with an election for federal office is involved.
It seems to me they’d be ruling on the legitimacy of how this NY case was handled. ‘Federal election’ is icing on the cake.