Claude.ai explains the "independent state legislature" theory: Moore v Harper

 

Art. I, section 4 provides: "The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators."

 I love chatting with Claude.ai. I will be sharing some of Claude's insights about Con Law here on the blog. 

Here is my chat with Claude about the "independent state legislature" theory which is discussed in Moore v. Harper (one of the first cases we will study):

Claude, please write a 750 word essay explaining the "independent state legislature theory" concerning the Elections Clause of the US Constitution.

RD

Here is a 748 word essay explaining the "independent state legislature theory" related to the Elections Clause:

The independent state legislature theory is a controversial legal doctrine arguing that state legislatures have near-total authority to set election rules and procedures under the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Article I, Section 4 states that the "Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof."

Proponents of the independent legislature theory interpret this clause to mean state legislatures alone set election regulations, without oversight from state courts or governors. The theory maintains that the word "Legislature" refers only to the representative lawmaking bodies of states, not the state government as a whole. Therefore, state legislatures possess plenary power over federal election procedures that cannot be constrained by state courts, constitutions, or other limits.

Under this view, the Elections Clause grants state legislatures independence and supremacy to regulate federal elections without interference from other state actors. State courts and executives have no role in regulating congressional elections. Limits imposed by state constitutions on legislators' authority over elections are invalid.

Furthermore, independent legislature advocates argue that Congress has the power to enforce this interpretation nationwide under the Elections Clause. They contend Congress may override election regulations imposed by state courts and governors to ensure state legislatures alone control election rules.

Critics counter that the independent legislature theory misinterprets the Elections Clause. They note the term “Legislature” can simply refer to the general lawmaking process in a state, encompassing constitutional limits and actions of the courts and governor. The broader context of the Constitution does not clearly indicate the Framers sought to exclude all other state institutions from influencing federal election rules.

Opponents also argue the theory undermines federalism by allowing state legislatures to ignore normal checks and balances at the state level. And they dispute that Congress has power under the Elections Clause to interfere in state election processes and override decisions by state courts or executives.

Overall, the validity of the independent state legislature theory remains hotly contested. Proponents believe it properly restores the role of state legislatures in federal elections. Critics see it as an extreme view that threatens both state sovereignty and fair democratic elections. The theory’s merits and implications continue to be the subject of significant legal debate.

 

Which view is more faithful to the text of the Elections Clause? What is the ordinary meaning of "the Legislature" of each state? Is a state court the state's "Legislature?" As Justice Thomas and Gorsuch argue in dissent, is the power to regulate the time, place, and manner of federal elections in the states a reserved power of the states? Or is that power a federal function created by the US Constitution and thus delegated to state legislatures under Article I, section 4?

Which view is more faithful to democracy in the states? Which branch of state government is the representative branch, the branch that reflects the contemporary voice of the people of the state?

How does it undermine federalism to allow state legislatures--as opposed to state courts--to decide issues concerning elections in the states? Could you argue that the theory actually advances federalism by allowing the elected representatives of the people in each state to govern the time, place, and manner of congressional elections in each state.

Be careful when you hear pundits claiming that when they don't get what they want, it is "a threat to our democracy." Actually, the opposite may often be closer to the truth.