California Poised To Require Presidential Candidates Release Tax Returns Before Appearing On Ballot

[wonderingrover]

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@mikee

My read is that it is unconstitutional.
Release of one’s tax returns is not a requirement of the office.
This measure bars eligable candidates from the ballot.
Not constitutional. (Supremacy and all that good constitutional stuff.)

Regardless of the wisdom of the measure, it won’t pass constitutional muster.

The constitution only defines the qualification for the job. It doesn’t define how states handle access to their ballots. Thus, why there aren’t any uniform procedures nationwide as to how 3rd party candidates get on the ballot.

The States have no authority to add qualifications for National election candidates.

There is no national election. There are 50 individual State elections.

[Samm]

@wonderingrover

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@mikee

My read is that it is unconstitutional.
Release of one’s tax returns is not a requirement of the office.
This measure bars eligable candidates from the ballot.
Not constitutional. (Supremacy and all that good constitutional stuff.)

Regardless of the wisdom of the measure, it won’t pass constitutional muster.

The constitution only defines the qualification for the job. It doesn’t define how states handle access to their ballots. Thus, why there aren’t any uniform procedures nationwide as to how 3rd party candidates get on the ballot.

The States have no authority to add qualifications for National election candidates.

There is no national election. There are 50 individual State elections.

Which are conducted under Federal Election rules. States can control who is on the ballot during the Primaries, but they cannot reject the nominees of the Parties.

[FloridaYankee]

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@mikee

My read is that it is unconstitutional.
Release of one’s tax returns is not a requirement of the office.
This measure bars eligable candidates from the ballot.
Not constitutional. (Supremacy and all that good constitutional stuff.)

Regardless of the wisdom of the measure, it won’t pass constitutional muster.

The constitution only defines the qualification for the job. It doesn’t define how states handle access to their ballots. Thus, why there aren’t any uniform procedures nationwide as to how 3rd party candidates get on the ballot.

The States have no authority to add qualifications for National election candidates.

Ballot access for presidential candidates

In order to get on the ballot, a candidate for president of the United States must meet a variety of complex, state-specific filing requirements and deadlines. These regulations, known as ballot access laws, determine whether a candidate or party will appear on an election ballot. These laws are set at the state level. A presidential candidate must prepare to meet ballot access requirements well in advance of primaries, caucuses, and the general election.

[wonderingrover]

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@mikee

My read is that it is unconstitutional.
Release of one’s tax returns is not a requirement of the office.
This measure bars eligable candidates from the ballot.
Not constitutional. (Supremacy and all that good constitutional stuff.)

Regardless of the wisdom of the measure, it won’t pass constitutional muster.

The constitution only defines the qualification for the job. It doesn’t define how states handle access to their ballots. Thus, why there aren’t any uniform procedures nationwide as to how 3rd party candidates get on the ballot.

The States have no authority to add qualifications for National election candidates.

There is no national election. There are 50 individual State elections.

Which are conducted under Federal Election rules. States can control who is on the ballot during the Primaries, but they cannot reject the nominees of the Parties.

Please let GA know that (as well as a host of other states). They rejected the Constitution Party candidate for President in 2016.

[Samm]

@wonderingrover

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@mikee

My read is that it is unconstitutional.
Release of one’s tax returns is not a requirement of the office.
This measure bars eligable candidates from the ballot.
Not constitutional. (Supremacy and all that good constitutional stuff.)

Regardless of the wisdom of the measure, it won’t pass constitutional muster.

The constitution only defines the qualification for the job. It doesn’t define how states handle access to their ballots. Thus, why there aren’t any uniform procedures nationwide as to how 3rd party candidates get on the ballot.

The States have no authority to add qualifications for National election candidates.

There is no national election. There are 50 individual State elections.

Which are conducted under Federal Election rules. States can control who is on the ballot during the Primaries, but they cannot reject the nominees of the Parties.

Please let GA know that (as well as a host of other states). They rejected the Constitution Party candidate for President in 2016.

Calling yourself a Party is not sufficient. All States have requirements as to what percent of the vote you must garner before you qualify as a legitimate political party.

[wonderingrover]

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@Samm

@wonderingrover

@mikee

My read is that it is unconstitutional.
Release of one’s tax returns is not a requirement of the office.
This measure bars eligable candidates from the ballot.
Not constitutional. (Supremacy and all that good constitutional stuff.)

Regardless of the wisdom of the measure, it won’t pass constitutional muster.

The constitution only defines the qualification for the job. It doesn’t define how states handle access to their ballots. Thus, why there aren’t any uniform procedures nationwide as to how 3rd party candidates get on the ballot.

The States have no authority to add qualifications for National election candidates.

There is no national election. There are 50 individual State elections.

Which are conducted under Federal Election rules. States can control who is on the ballot during the Primaries, but they cannot reject the nominees of the Parties.

Please let GA know that (as well as a host of other states). They rejected the Constitution Party candidate for President in 2016.

Calling yourself a Party is not sufficient. All States have requirements as to what percent of the vote you must garner before you qualify as a legitimate political party.

Yeah, go with that.

[Samm]

I will. I always go with the facts.

[wonderingrover]

This place provides great comedic relief every once in a while.

[Steel-W0LF]

I think this is a great idea.

All the liberal strongholds that Rs aren’t going to win anyway should do this!

Rs can just ignore them and not change their vote totals at all, while all the liberals have to air their dirty laundry to the world.

[Munimula1]

Down ballot.

[Weedhopper]

Why just Trump? What about all of the Politicians running for office, should they do the same?

[Chris]

How much more can California Republicans suffer???

RIP, California GOP: Republicans lash out after midterm election debacle