On Moore v. Harper and why the "independent state legislature theory" makes no sense.

Oral arguments in #SCOTUS have begun.

They're hyper-citing founder-folk because they can't support their claim w/actual evidence from the founding period.

Below is a paragraph from the amicus brief filled by a group of historians of the founding period. The brief as a whole can be found here:

https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1271/244058/20221026155401139_Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Founding%20Era%20Scholars%2021-1271.pdf

@jbf1755 #alttext As historians who have studied and written extensively about the constitutional history of the revolutionary era, our answer to the question driving this litigation is clear. The original public meaning of the Elections Clause did not give the state legislatures exclusive power to regulate congressional elections, unchecked by the state constitution or other branches of state government. (1/3)
@jbf1755 Nothing in the records of the deliberations at Philadelphia or the public debates surrounding ratification supports that contention. There is no evidence that anyone at the time expressed the view that Petitioners now espouse; nor would anyone have attempted to disprove an idea that had never been broached. (2/3)
@jbf1755 Petitioners interpretation is also historically implausible in view of the framers' general fear of unchecked power and their specific distrust of state legislatures.
There is no plausible eighteenth-century argument to support Petitioners' view. (3/3)