Question not identified.

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In state court cases implicating the Elections Clause, this Court has a “duty to safeguard limits imposed by the Federal Constitution.” Moore v. Harper, 600 U.S. 1, 35, 37 (2023). This Court alone can ensure that state courts do “not so exceed the bounds of ordinary judicial review as to unconstitutionally intrude upon the role specifically reserved to state legislatures by Article I, Section 4, of the Federal Constitution.” Id. at 37. But it has not yet adopted any “test by which [it] can measure state court interpretations of state law” in those kinds of cases. Id. at 36. The questions presented are: 1. When this Court reviews a state court’s decision invalidating state Elections Clause legislation, what standard does it apply to decide whether that decision exceeds the bounds of ordinary judicial review? 2. Did the Montana Supreme Court’s split decision below exceed the bounds of ordinary judicial review by invalidating under the Montana Constitution two Montana election integrity provisions—one setting the voter-registration deadline at noon the day before Election Day, and another requiring the Secretary to promulgate regulations banning paid absentee ballot collection?