We are one supreme court decision away (via the independent legislature doctrine) wherein a state legislature could overrule its own laws or constitution and federal law and flip election outcomes as they desire, both statewide and federally.
The decision to even hear the case is radical and affirming would represent a massive shift away from democracy in the US as we know it.
I'm assuming you're talking about this one [1]. It's actually an interesting and important question that could use revisiting.
>Issue: Whether a state’s judicial branch may nullify the regulations governing the “Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives ... prescribed ... by the Legislature thereof,” and replace them with regulations of the state courts’ own devising, based on vague state constitutional provisions purportedly vesting the state judiciary with power to prescribe whatever rules it deems appropriate to ensure a “fair” or “free” election.
I don't think a question where one possible answer is "legislatures can unilaterally decide the results of their own elections" is one that needs revisiting and its astounding that anyone could sincerely believe that that is what the framers intended
That's not what's at issue? How are you getting there. It's about who gets to decide the rules, legislatures or the court. Dunno about you, but that seems like a good question to get settled.
The legislature already decides the rules through the traditional legislative process. If the legislature alone decides the rules without judicial or executive checks it can engineer whatever result it wants. We don't let congress do whatever it wants just because the federal constitution has "vague principles" that courts try to hold them to, it shouldn't be any different for states and state elections.
The decision to even hear the case is radical and affirming would represent a massive shift away from democracy in the US as we know it.