Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-980_f2q3.pdf
Page Number: 26

2 

HUSTED v. A. PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE 

THOMAS, J., concurring 

tions  requisite  for  Electors  of  the  most  numerous  Branch 
of  the  State  Legislature.”    U. S.  Const.,  Art. I,  §2,  cl. 1.  
The  Seventeenth  Amendment  imposes  an  identical  re-
quirement for elections of Senators.  And the Constitution 
recognizes the authority of States to “appoint” Presidential 
electors  “in  such  Manner  as  the  Legislature  thereof  may 
direct.”  Art. II, §1, cl. 2; see Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., 
570 U. S., at 35, n. 2 (opinion of THOMAS, J.).  States thus 
retain the authority to decide the qualifications to vote in 
federal  elections,  limited  only  by  the  requirement  that 
they  not  “ ‘establish  special  requirements’ ”  for  congres-
sional  elections  “ ‘that  do  not  apply  in  elections  for  the 
state legislature.’ ”    Id.,  at  26  (quoting  U. S.  Term  Limits, 
Inc.  v.  Thornton,  514  U. S.  779,  865  (1995)  (THOMAS,  J., 
dissenting)).  And because the power to establish require-
ments  would  mean  little  without  the  ability  to  enforce 
them,  the  Voter  Qualifications  Clause  also  “gives  States 
the  authority  . . .  to  verify  whether  [their]  qualifications 
are satisfied.”  570 U. S., at 28. 
  Respondents’  reading  of  the  NVRA  would  seriously 
interfere  with  the  States’  constitutional  authority  to  set 
and enforce voter qualifications.  To vote in Ohio, electors 
must  have  been  a  state  resident  30  days  before  the  elec-
tion, as well as a resident of the county and precinct where 
they vote.  Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §3503.01(A) (Lexis 2015); 
see  also  Ohio  Const.,  Art. V,  §1.    Ohio  uses  a  record  of 
nonvoting  as  one  piece  of  evidence  that  voters  no  longer 
satisfy  the  residence  requirement.    Reading  the  NVRA  to 
bar  Ohio  from  considering  nonvoting  would  therefore 
interfere  with  the  State’s  “authority  to  verify”  that  its 
qualifications  are  met  “in  the  way  it  deems  necessary.”  
Inter  Tribal  Council  of  Ariz.,  supra,  at  36.    Respondents’ 
reading  thus  renders  the  NVRA  constitutionally  suspect 
and should be disfavored.  See Jennings, supra, at ___ (slip 
op., at 2). 
  Respondents  counter  that  Congress’  power  to  regulate