Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/19-465_i425.pdf
Page Number: 25.0

4 

CHIAFALO v. WASHINGTON 

THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment 

final language of Article II “seems to have reconciled [the]
contrariety of views by leaving it to the state legislatures” 
to set the Manner of elector appointment.  Ibid.  In context, 
it is clear that the Framers understood “Manner” in Article 
II,  §1,  to  refer  to  the  mode  of  appointing  electors—con-
sistent with the plain meaning of the term. 

This  understanding  of  “Manner”  was  seemingly  shared
by those at the ratifying conventions.  For instance, at the 
North  Carolina  ratifying  convention,  John  Steele  stated
that “[t]he power over the manner of elections [under Arti-
cle I, §4] does not include that of saying who shall vote.” 4 
Debates on the Constitution 71 (J. Elliot ed. 1863) (empha-
sis added).  Rather “the power over the manner only enables 
[States] to determine how these electors shall elect.”  Ibid. 
(emphasis added and deleted).  In short, the historical con-
text and contemporaneous use of the term “Manner” seem 
to indicate that the Framers and the ratifying public both
understood the term in accordance with its plain meaning. 
Finally,  the  Court’s  interpretation  gives  the  same 
term—“Manner”—different meanings in two parallel provi-
sions  of  the  Constitution.  Article  I,  §4,  states  that  “[t]he
Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators
and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by 
the Legislature thereof.”  In U. S. Term Limits, the Court 
concluded that the term “Manner” in Article I includes only 
“a grant of authority to issue procedural regulations,” not 
“the broad power to set qualifications.”  514 U. S., at 832– 
833 (majority opinion); see also id., at 861–864 (THOMAS, J., 
dissenting).  Yet, today, the Court appears to take the exact
opposite  view.  The  Court  interprets  the  term  “Manner” 
in Article II, §1, to include the power to impose conditions
or  qualifications  on  the  appointment  of  electors.    Ante, 
at 9–10. 

With  respect,  I  demur.    “When  seeking  to  discern  the
meaning  of  a  word  in  the  Constitution,  there  is  no  better 
dictionary than the rest of the Constitution itself.”  Arizona