Watson v. Republican National Committee · ¶96

This argument withers on examination, especially as applied to Civil War practices. The States were acutely aware of the federal election-day statutes, and they abandoned practices that they had previously used and presumably preferred in order to comply with them. As the majority notes, before 1845, States had “total control over the timing” of elections for the House of Representatives and substantial leeway to select the date on which voters chose Presidential electors. Ante, at 2. States took advantage of this freedom by holding elections on a variety of dates. Ibid. After 1845, however, States abandoned the practices they previously preferred and held elections on the date Congress specified. Ibid. The majority’s argument therefore boils down to this: States complied with what they understood the federal election-day statutes to require; they did not believe that those laws…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.