17th amendment

[NPT]

What's everyone's opinion of this recent ruling? Do you agree with Roberts that the 17th Amendment clearly gives the state legislatures the power to redistrict. When I read the 17th I really don't see where he gets that opinion but I've never studied the constitution. I am making that statement just from reading the amendment.

 

[hoot1]

I'm no Constitutional scholar as so many are who come to the Cooler , but my thoughts take me in the direction of thinking our founders left elections up to the states.

Even the BOR (Bill of Rights) didn't make voting a right. Hard to believe, but unfortunately true.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

What's everyone's opinion of this recent ruling? Do you agree with Roberts that the 17th Amendment clearly gives the state legislatures the power to redistrict. When I read the 17th I really don't see where he gets that opinion but I've never studied the constitution. I am making that statement just from reading the amendment.

The problem isn't you, NPT. Just a sloppy news report. The power of the legislature to regulate elections is found in Article 1, Section 4. The power to draw district lines has always been considered a part of this authority.

Without reading Ginsburg's opinion, I'm guessing the response to Roberts is something like this: states that have decided to allow the people to overrule the legislature through direct democracy means implicitly accept that the people can exercise is power for all legislative functions, including those specifically delineated by the Constitution. It's similar to pre-17th amendment times, when, despite the text of the Constitution, many states nevertheless had effective direct election if Senators thanks to state laws.

Not the same, of course, as legislatures in theory could have simply voided such laws, and here Arizona has no suh recourse. But still similar.