Page:Moore v. Harper.pdf/36

Rh

, concurring.

I join the Court’s opinion in full. The Court today correctly concludes that state laws governing federal elections are subject to ordinary state court review, including for compliance with the relevant state constitution. ,, . But because the Elections Clause assigns authority respecting federal elections to state legislatures, the Court also correctly concludes that “state courts do not have free rein” in conducting that review. Therefore, a state court’s interpretation of state law in a case implicating the Elections Clause is subject to federal court review. ; see also Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd., 531 U. S. 70, 76–78 (2000) (unanimously concluding that a state court’s interpretation of state law in a federal election case presents a federal issue); cf. Democratic National Committee v. Wisconsin State Legislature, 592 U. S. ___, ___, n. 1 (2020) (, concurring in denial of application to vacate stay) (slip op., at 9, n. 1). Federal court review of a state court’s interpretation of state law in a federal election case “does not imply a disrespect for state courts but rather a respect for the constitutionally prescribed role of state legislatures.”