A study is presented to examine the implications of this guidance, which disregards the column interaction check (including both axial force and moment) under overstrength seismic loads. A set of thirteen steel moment frames are designed using multiple rules that apply and disregard overstrength, drift, and cross-sectional compactness checks in various combinations. The frames are subjected to a suite of simulations including linear elastic, nonlinear static pushover, nonlinear response history, and continuum finite element simulations that are able to represent a range of physical behavior modes in the columns including interactive nonlinear geometric instabilities that could trigger loss of the load carrying capacity of the member. The simulations indicate no significant distinction between the seismic performance of steel moment resisting frames designed as per current code-based provisions (i.e., disregarding the column interaction check for overstrength seismic loads), and those designed with the use of the interaction check, with each providing acceptable response without failure. The simulations also indicate that design checks for drift and cross-sectional compactness play a significant role ensuring acceptable response, providing additional margin of safety beyond the member strength checks.