Each of us swims in an ocean of relationships. Some are formal, written, and signed by the parties involved, and many, perhaps most of them, are unspoken and understood. Many relationships involve imbalances of power, like parents and children, or employers and employees. Sometimes we aren’t aware of some of the relationships we’re in. Those of us who were born in the U.S. immediately entered into a relationship with extreme power imbalances. We wouldn’t understand this asymmetric relationship until adulthood. It’s our U.S. citizenship, establishing our relationship with the U.S. government. It conferred on each of us certain rights, freedoms, responsibilities, and protections.
This column will focus on that specific relationship that came with citizenship. As this column describes, our citizenship also creates important relationships for each of us with the state in which we reside.
The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, the final one in the Bill of Rights, consists of only one sentence:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The amendment is sometimes referred to as the “Reservation Clause” because it reserves powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution to the state governments, or the people. In general terms, the Reservation Clause establishes decentralization as a kind of default Federal policy. Simply put, it states that any powers not explicitly given to the federal government in the Constitution or federal laws are the responsibilities of state-level governments. Conversely, powers assigned to the three branches of the federal government may not be encroached by state governments.
Examples of authorities reserved for States under the Tenth Amendment are public safety, education, and health.
Why did the Founders think the Amendment was necessary? At the time that the Constitutional Convention was arguing over the text in Philadelphia, states were concerned that the federal government would try to take responsibility for functions that are better served by them. The experience of being an English colony was fresh and distasteful. They wanted decisions made by states and local governments whenever possible. After all, state governments were closer to the populations being served than the faraway national government.
One of the most important issues that arose from the general debate between central and distributed authorities was the specific responsibility for conducting elections.
Who should be in charge?
Article I, Section IV of the Constitution, is unusual. Article I is all about Congress, but this Section is about state legislatures. It gave them primary responsibility for conducting Federal elections. Here is the text of Article I, Section IV, also known as ‘The Elections Clause.’
“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.”
Why was the Elections Clause so important to the Founders? They struggled with two competing forces. Federalism was the political philosophy that advocated for the separation of powers between central and state governments. Federalists such as John Adams and Alexander Hamilton advocated for strong central governments. Anti-Federalists like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison feared that over time, too much centralized power could lead to the decline of representational democracy and its replacement by a monarchy, like the one they had recently rebelled against.
In Federalist Paper 59, Alexander Hamilton warned that if States controlled Federal elections, they could destroy the young nation by cancelling elections, so he favored federal control of elections.
Opponents were concerned that giving Congress or the President control of the elections could lead to corruption of elections by incumbents running for reelection. They preferred to let the States run elections, protecting the integrity of elections by distributing responsibility for their administration.
The version shown above was the compromise signed by the delegates to the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787. It gave the primary responsibility for running elections to States but gave Congress the ability to pass laws that change the ways that States conduct them. The original version ended with this passage “except as to the Places of chusing [sic] Senators.” Senators were selected by state legislatures until the Seventeenth Amendment (1913) replaced that system with direct election by voters.
Elections are central to our system of representative democracy, so many, but not all, of the changes to elections have been achieved through amendments to the Constitution, not laws. Amendments prohibited the denial of voting rights based on race (1870) and gender (1920); banning poll taxes (1964); and changing the voting age to 18 (1971). Other protections of voting rights have been enacted through federal laws such as protecting those with disabilities. States have retained their authority to set requirements for the form of identification presented before voting.
Nearly 250 years after its adoption, the Elections Clause still plays a critical role in protecting the integrity of elections. Recent history has shown the importance of preventing conflicts of interest by distributing authority over elections.
President Trump has challenged the outcome of the 2020 election and has accused certain states of allowing the election to be stolen from him. He availed himself of all the legal ways to challenge the outcome of an election through recounts and lawsuits (described in an earlier column).
He tried other strategies not involving legal actions, such as asking the Georgia Secretary of State to ‘find the votes’ needed to award him the state’s electoral votes. When these failed and the date for Congress to certify the electoral votes (January 6, 2021) approached, the President pressured his Vice President to stop the certification process and send the election to the House of Representatives. In such cases, each state delegation to the House of Representative would cast one vote for a candidate. Since the majority of state delegations had Republican majorities at the time, the President would have been re-elected. When he refused, the President’s final hope was that a mob of his supporters would attack the Capitol building on January 6th and would stop the certification process stipulated in the Constitution.
Now that he has been elected to a second term, the President continues his attempts to undermine confidence in federal elections, including the upcoming 2026 midterm elections. The Brennan Center for Justice has compiled a 2025-26 timeline of the Trump Administration’s actions concerning the administration of elections.
He may be considering a run for a third term, despite a Constitutional amendment prohibiting it. Alternatively, he may be seeking ways to delay or cancel future elections, citing ‘proof’ of massive voter fraud by undocumented immigrants, or an imagined national emergency.
The Constitution grants the President no role in the conduct of Federal elections. Article I, Section IV, does allow Congress to make changes through legislation. Our Constitutional structure relies on the character of the members of Congress and their devotion to their oaths of office. Unfortunately, Congress has shown no appetite for confronting the President’s efforts to change the ways that elections are conducted.
The ultimate safeguard of our democracy is the wisdom of We, the People, as we vote for Congresspeople who will serve our interests, not their own.
One Response
Thank you for this timely explanation of the Constitutional framework for federal elections. This President’s failed attempt to overturn his 2020 election loss demonstrates his refusal to honor American voters’ clearly expressed will at the ballot box.
His fading popularity, rising prices, rising unemployment, and telegraphed intentions to interfere with the midterm elections put all Americans on notice. Democracy itself is on the ballot box, protecting it is our responsibility. Your article explains the Constitutional protections and the stakes. Thank you.