Congressional Power Under the U.S. Constitution: What It Can and Cannot Do on Election Rules

A recent debate in national political discourse asserts that the U.S. Constitution “explicitly states that Congress may regulate elections.” That is true — but what Congress can regulate, and how far that authority extends, is shaped both by constitutional text and a long history of statute, litigation, and evolution in election law.

The Constitutional Foundation: The Elections Clause

Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution — commonly known as the Elections Clause — states that:

“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, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.”

This clause sets up a dual authority:

• States (through their legislatures) generally set the rules for federal elections
• Congress has the authority to override or alter state election regulations at any time, except for where Senators are physically chosen.

Scholars and legal resources confirm that this clause gives Congress broad power to regulate federal elections — historically used to set uniform election dates, district requirements, and registration standards.

How Courts and History Interpret That Power

Legal interpretations, including Supreme Court guidance, recognize that the Elections Clause empowers Congress to enact federal standards that override state election rules if Congress chooses to do so.

However, in practice Congress’s exercise of this power has been measured, and most aspects of election administration—such as voter ID requirements, ballot formats, and mail-in processes—have traditionally been governed by state law and practice, subject to federal constitutional constraints.

For example:

• The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) sets minimum federal requirements for voter registration opportunities — an exercise of federal authority over federal election processes.
• Congress has set a uniform date for general federal elections.

But relatively few modern statutes directly restructure core mechanics of voting itself.

Policy Proposals and Constitutional Limits

Proponents of federal election reforms have suggested that with a simple majority, Congress could legislate changes such as:

• Requiring photo ID for federal elections
• Mandating paper ballots
• Requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote
• Banning ranked-choice voting nationwide
• Restoring or altering in-person voting rules in specific states

Whether any of these would survive legal challenge depends on:

1. Whether the statute is within Congress’s power under the Elections Clause;
2. Whether it conflicts with other constitutional protections (equal protection, voting rights amendments, etc.);
3. The judiciary’s interpretation of the scope of the Elections Clause.

Recent events illustrate these limits. A federal judge blocked key portions of a 2025 presidential executive order that sought to require documentary proof of citizenship on federal voter registration forms, noting that the president lacked constitutional authority to unilaterally impose such changes. The judge emphasized that only Congress — not the executive — has the constitutional power to regulate federal election rules.

Moreover, a separate ruling permanently struck down the citizenship requirement in the order, affirming that requiring passports or similar documents to vote runs afoul of constitutional limits on executive authority over elections.

These cases underscore a key point: while the Elections Clause vest regulatory power in Congress, it does not give unchecked authority to other branches or allow rewriting of state election laws absent an act of Congress.

In Practice: State and Federal Roles

Under the current legal framework:

• States continue to administer federal elections — setting registration procedures, ballot design, polling locations, and day-to-day operations.
• Congress retains the authority to impose nationwide rules related to timing, manner, and overall structure of congressional elections, but its use of that authority is rarely absolute and is subject to legal interpretation.

What This Means for Future Election Policy

Calls for sweeping federal election reforms must reckon with both constitutional text and decades of judicial interpretation. While Congress can pass laws that shape federal election mechanics, those laws must:

• Be enacted through the normal legislative process
• Respect constitutional protections
• Likely face legal scrutiny if they substantially alter long-standing state prerogatives

In short: the Elections Clause does give Congress meaningful authority, but that authority exists within a constitutional framework that balances federal standards with state control and safeguards for voters’ rights.