 After deciding that the statute 's subject matter necessitated the strict scrutiny approach , the District Court decided on June 10 , 1991 that it was an unconstitutional violation of the right to vote for and select Senate candidates . This decision was appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit , who decided against the use of the strict scrutiny approach and , in its absence , ruled that the statute was not a violation of the Fourteenth and Seventeenth Amendments . Academics have been critical of both the decision reached and the approach used , with one suggesting that the " substantial state interests " test used in Valenti v. Rockefeller would be more appropriate . 
 After deciding that the statute <a href='null_genetive' title='1'><mark>'s</mark></a>subject matter necessitated the strict scrutiny approach , the District Court decided on June 10 , 1991 that it was an unconstitutional violation of the right to vote for and select Senate candidates . This decision was appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit , <a href='null_relcl' title='2'><mark>who</mark></a>decided against the use of the strict scrutiny approach and , in its absence , ruled that the statute <a href='negative_concord' title='3'><mark>was</mark></a> <a href='negative_concord' title='4'><mark>not</mark></a><a href='None' title='5'><mark>a</mark></a><a href='negative_concord' title='6'><mark>violation</mark></a> of the Fourteenth and Seventeenth Amendments . Academics have been critical of both the decision reached and the approach used , with one suggesting that the " substantial state interests <a href='null_genetive' title='7'><mark>"</mark></a>test used in Valenti v. Rockefeller would be more appropriate . 
After deciding dat the statute  subject matter necessitated the strict scrutiny approach , the District Court decided on June 10 , 1991 tdatit was an unconstitutional violation of the right to vote for and select Senate candidates . dis decision was appealed to the Court of Appeals for da Third Circuit , decided against tdause of the strict scrutiny approach and , in its absence , ruled that the statute ain't no violation of the Fourteenth and Seventeenth Amendments . Academics have been critical of both the decision reached and the approach used , with one suggesting that the " substantial state interests  test used in Valenti v. Rockefeller would b more appropriate .