Back to that Prigg v Pennsylvania for this sort of nonsense. Obviously Constitutional law is supreme, but apparently States are under no obligation to enforce constitutional law.
Certainly in the case of Prigg v Pennsylvania they weren't.
A change in the wording of state election law is needed in those states because the “damn job” of the Secretary of State is to rubber stamp a party’s nominee.
No, the law just needs to be tossed out as "unconstitutional." It is and ought to be the duty of every government official to ensure compliance with constitutional law.
This is a situation where the courts should have been doing their D@mn job for the last two centuries.
In one post you denigrate the courts as useless and an hour later you want them to resolve the issue!