Bound Volume 514 - Supreme Court of the United States

514us3$60N 06-15-98 09:38:31 PAGES OPINPGT
Cite as: 514 U. S. 779 (1995)
Thomas, J., dissenting
See ante, at 804. This command meshes with one of the
principal purposes of Congress’ “make or alter” power: to
ensure that the States hold congressional elections in the
first place, so that Congress continues to exist. As one reporter
summarized a speech made by John Jay at the New
York ratifying convention:
“[E]very government was imperfect, unless it had a
power of preserving itself. Suppose that, by design or
accident, the states should neglect to appoint representatives;
certainly there should be some constitutional
remedy for this evil. The obvious meaning of the paragraph
was, that, if this neglect should take place, Congress
should have power, by law, to support the government,
and prevent the dissolution of the Union. [Jay]
believed this was the design of the federal Convention.”
2 Elliot 326 (emphasis in original). 10
Constitutional provisions that impose affirmative duties on
the States are hardly inconsistent with the notion of reserved
powers.
10 Accord, e. g., 2 Elliot 24 (remarks of Caleb Strong at the Massachusetts
ratifying convention) (“[I]f the legislature of a state should refuse to make
such regulations, the consequence will be, that the representatives will
not be chosen, and the general government will be dissolved. In such
case, can gentlemen say that a power to remedy the evil is not necessary
to be lodged somewhere? And where can it be lodged but in Congress?”);
2 Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution 400 (M.
Jensen ed. 1976) (notes of Anthony Wayne at the Pennsylvania ratifying
convention) (“4th section occasioned by an eventual invasion, insurrection,
etc.”); The Federalist No. 59, at 363 (Hamilton) (observing that if not
subject to any checks, the States “could at any moment annihilate [the
Federal Government] by neglecting to provide for the choice of persons to
administer its affairs”).
These statements about the Clause’s purposes also help refute the
majority’s claim that it was bizarre for the Framers to leave the States
relatively free to enact qualifications for congressional office while simultaneously
giving Congress “make or alter” power over the States’ time,
place, and manner regulations. See infra, at 896–898.
863