Bill, given Kevin's description, if federal guidance, and I'm using air quotes for our folks listening, just because it is sort of this nebulous thing, it's Kevin saying, if it's not legally binding, why do people care? At the state level, if some federal guidance letter came down, why wouldn't a state agency say, eh, it's not legally binding, no thanks? Yeah.

Well, I loved Kevin's description.

I think that was really helpful.

Yeah.

And as helpful as it can be, given that how how how nebulous it is.

I think that the reality is if you are highly regulated, as many, many state agencies are, they either taking money from the government.

There's some kind of oversight from from a federal agency.

But what would you say are some of the most I guess, gripping or compelling examples of where this has happened in a way that should make all of us say, this is not a good way to run a country.

Can you give our listeners a quick overview of what that case was and how it landed?

Yeah, I, this is not one as I've watched as closely.

Uh, and so I wish Dr. Brogdon was here.

He, he seems to know, uh, everything and, and such a great resource.

But, but, um, but yeah, basically, so the, the, the concern in that case, so some states, many states, uh, uh, will count, uh, uh, ballots that are received after election.

So in other words, you got it in the mail, but it, it wasn't delivered on Election Day.

Can those still be counted? And, uh, the, the Trump administration position and, and position of others is that, uh, no.

And then a- as we go down the list as well, a- any of the other cases we've missed that you wanna make sure you get a chance to touch on?

In your view, what would that look like on this issue? I

probably don't have all the answers on that, but I will say, I loved Ben's point about about partisanship, about the sort of extreme political divide.

And I think that's exactly where federalism could make a difference for good, right, is to allow for, because, you know, different states approach things differently and can be a little less divided.

And I think, you know, obviously, some of that's colored by our experience here in Utah, where where there are certainly divisions, but perhaps not as extreme as we see in some other places.

So allowing the states in the first place to make these decisions.

Ben said something earlier I think I want to underscore that's really, really important that There is a recognition in the Constitution that there can be challenges that we need to address with state supervision of elections and carrying out elections and local.

But those are intended to be resolved by Congress.

From a constitutional standpoint, Bill, why is that a better way to design election administration?