but rather an enhancement to the State’s authority to regulate its ballot under the Elections Clause of the United States Constitution. The Elections Clause provides that the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof....” U.S. Const, art. I, § 4, cl. 1. That the States maintain a “discretionary power over elections,” a power restricted to the procedural regulation of the times, places and manner of elections, is not in dispute. The Federalist No. 59; see also The Federalist No. 60 (examining the potential “danger” of “confiding the ultimate right of regulating its own elections to the Union itself’). See, e.g., Libertarian Party of Illinois v. Rednour, 108 F.3d 768, 777 (7th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court has recognized that “States
holding that reasonable access includes general facility access without notice and patient access with twentyfour hour notice holding that remand was necessary when the alj failed to adhere to  4041527d2s procedural requirements and noting that a de minimis violation of those procedural requirements may qualify as harmless error holding that illinois ballot access petitioning requirements were entirely procedural holding that court had no obligation to inform pro se litigant of procedural requirements due to clear evidence in record including inter alia defendants mention of requirements in summary judgment motion that litigant knew requirements holding that an ineffective assistance of counsel claim alleged to be cause for the procedural default of other claims is itself an independent claim subject to the procedural requirements of exhaustion