Michigan bases its arguments on the finding in
New York that “even where Congress has the authority under the Constitution to pass laws requiring or prohibiting certain acts, it lacks the power directly to compel the States to require or prohibit those acts.”
New York, 505 U.S. at 166, 112 S.Ct. at 2423. We agree that, where Congress has merely been granted the authority to require or prohibit a certain act, Congress may not exercise its authority by forcing state legislation. We also recognize, however, a distinction in how Congress can exercise each of its powers in question in the
New York case, and in the case at hand. The
New York Court addressed a challenge to a Congressional exercise of its power under the Commerce Clause—a power that enables Congress only to
make laws affecting the states. In the case at hand, we are addressing a challenge to a Congressional exercise of its power to regulate federal elections—a power that enables Congress both to
make and alter laws affecting the states with regard to this issue.