 Laura E. Little , writing in the Temple Law Review , notes the dearth of guidance for either the District Court or Court of Appeals in Trinsey , with no " explicit direction and no direct precedent " from either the constitutional provisions or prior case law to rely on . In the absence of guidance , the Court of Appeals took a narrow view of the issues , something she criticises . Under Pennsylvanian law , primaries are mandatory in all other elections , and in her opinion the lack of a primary in this case should have been judged to be a violation of Trinsey 's fundamental rights . Combined with the purpose of the Seventeenth Amendment - to ensure direct election - this should have led to the application of the strict scrutiny test , and the decision that the statute governing special elections was unconstitutional . Kevin M. Gold instead suggests that the test used in Valenti v. Rockefeller , an analogous decision over the validity of New York state electoral law . In Valenti , the judiciary applied the " substantial state interests " test , which involves simply looking at whether the statute in question furthers the interests of the states , who under the Seventeenth Amendment are given some discretion as to the electoral process they use . 
 Laura E. Little , writing in the Temple Law Review , <a href='uninflect' title='1'><mark>notes</mark></a> the dearth of guidance for either the District Court or Court of Appeals in Trinsey , with no " explicit direction and no direct precedent " from either the constitutional provisions or prior case law to rely on . In the absence of guidance , the Court of Appeals took a narrow view of the issues , something she <a href='uninflect' title='2'><mark>criticises</mark></a> . Under Pennsylvanian law , primaries <a href='drop_aux' title='3'><mark>are</mark></a>mandatory in all other elections , and in her opinion the lack of a primary in this case should <a href='been_done' title='4'><mark>have</mark></a> been judged to be a violation of Trinsey <a href='null_genetive' title='5'><mark>'s</mark></a>fundamental rights . Combined with the purpose of the Seventeenth Amendment - to ensure direct election - this should <a href='been_done' title='6'><mark>have</mark></a> led to the application of the strict scrutiny test , and the decision that the statute governing special elections was unconstitutional . Kevin M. Gold instead <a href='uninflect' title='7'><mark>suggests</mark></a> that the test used in Valenti v. Rockefeller , an analogous decision over the validity of New York state electoral law . In Valenti , the judiciary applied the " substantial state interests <a href='null_genetive' title='8'><mark>"</mark></a>test , which <a href='uninflect' title='9'><mark>involves</mark></a> simply looking at whether the statute in question furthers the interests of the states , <a href='null_relcl' title='10'><mark>who</mark></a>under the Seventeenth Amendment are given some discretion as to the electoral process they use . 
Laura E. Little , writing in the Temple Law Review , note the dearth of guidance fa either the District Court or Court of Appeals in Trinsey , with no " explicit direction and no direct precedent " from either the constitutional provisions or prior case law to rely on . In the absence of guidance , the Court of Appeals took a narrow view of the issues , something she criticise . Under Pennsylvanian law , primaries mandatory in all other elections , and in her opinion the lack of a primary in this case should done been judged to be a violation of Trinsey  fundamental rights . Combined witt the purpose of the Seventeenth Amendment - to ensure direct election - dis should done led to da application of tdastrict scrutiny test , and thdaecision that the statute governing special elections was unconstitutional . Kevin M. Gold instead suggest that the test used in Valenti v. Rockefeller , an analogous decision over the validity of New York state electoral law . In Valenti , the judiciary applied the " substantial state interests  test , which involve simply lookin at whether the statute in question furthers the interests of the states , under the Seventeenth Amendment are given sum discretion as to the electoral process they use .