Judicial Watch Sues over California Law Requiring Presidential Candidates to Submit Tax Returns

[pknopp]

I'm not sure this will work because of "standing". It may have to be a candidate that gets disqualified.

Not saying this is fact, just a possibility.

Yes this is how it is always done.

Otherwise, there would have been no challenges in Bush v. Gore or a whole host of other litigation since.

.

Bush v Gore was challenged on the idea that people's votes were not being counted.

 

[pknopp]

the way to get around having to show your tax returns is to sue Congress - fuck the voters


Analysts say most Americans want to see Trump's tax returns

Congress has no right to his tax returns, so your claim is patently false.

you do know Trump is suing Congress dont you ?

If Trump is kept off a ballot, he can indeed sue.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not sure this will work because of "standing". It may have to be a candidate that gets disqualified.

Not saying this is fact, just a possibility.

Voters have standing.

That isn't how courts look at it. I don't like when they do this either but right now there hasn't been a single voter stopped from voting for anyone.

Yes, that is how courts look at it.

The law will obviously stop voters from voting for Trump.

What kind of idiot are you?

You can't sue unless you have been harmed. You can't sue because you think you might be harmed. I don't know what to tell you. That's the way it works.

They law prevents them from voting for the candidate of their choice. They are being harmed. If they made law to disallow any candidate on the ballot who didn't own at least $1 million in real property, would that harm anyone?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Will be fun to watch this go through the system.

It may not make it through the courts, and may be dismissed, because those suing are not harmed??? AND because according to the constitution, aren't States given the power to set the parameters/rules of their own elections???

Of course they are harmed. They are being prevented from voting for the candidate of their choice because of some arbitrary whim of the state government.

That happened in 39 states last election for every one that wanted to vote for Evan McMullen

 

[bripat9643]

the way to get around having to show your tax returns is to sue Congress - fuck the voters


Analysts say most Americans want to see Trump's tax returns

Congress has no right to his tax returns, so your claim is patently false.

you do know Trump is suing Congress dont you ?

If Trump is kept off a ballot, he can indeed sue.

The voters can also sue, moron.

 

[Terri4Trump]

I'm not sure this will work because of "standing". It may have to be a candidate that gets disqualified.

Not saying this is fact, just a possibility.

Thats possible. But considering that various "groups" challenge various laws successfully all the time, I think this will work.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I'm not sure this will work because of "standing". It may have to be a candidate that gets disqualified.

Not saying this is fact, just a possibility.

Voters have standing.

That isn't how courts look at it. I don't like when they do this either but right now there hasn't been a single voter stopped from voting for anyone.

Yes, that is how courts look at it.

The law will obviously stop voters from voting for Trump.

What kind of idiot are you?

You can't sue unless you have been harmed. You can't sue because you think you might be harmed. I don't know what to tell you. That's the way it works.

Wrong. You can sue if there is a substantial possibility that you will be harmed and that the issue will not be persuadable in any other way.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I'm not sure this will work because of "standing". It may have to be a candidate that gets disqualified.

Not saying this is fact, just a possibility.

Yes this is how it is always done.

Otherwise, there would have been no challenges in Bush v. Gore or a whole host of other litigation since.

.

Bush v Gore was challenged on the idea that people's votes were not being counted.

And, this will be different how?

.

 

[bripat9643]

Will be fun to watch this go through the system.

It may not make it through the courts, and may be dismissed, because those suing are not harmed??? AND because according to the constitution, aren't States given the power to set the parameters/rules of their own elections???

Of course they are harmed. They are being prevented from voting for the candidate of their choice because of some arbitrary whim of the state government.

That happened in 39 states last election for every one that wanted to vote for Evan McMullen

He was kept off the ballot because he didn't follow the prescribe procedure for getting on the ballot.

 

[Siete]

the way to get around having to show your tax returns is to sue Congress - fuck the voters


Analysts say most Americans want to see Trump's tax returns

Congress has no right to his tax returns, so your claim is patently false.

you do know Trump is suing Congress dont you ?

If Trump is kept off a ballot, he can indeed sue.

he is even if he's still on the ballot -

Trump Sues House Panel, New York Officials to Protect State Tax Returns

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Will be fun to watch this go through the system.

It may not make it through the courts, and may be dismissed, because those suing are not harmed??? AND because according to the constitution, aren't States given the power to set the parameters/rules of their own elections???

Of course they are harmed. They are being prevented from voting for the candidate of their choice because of some arbitrary whim of the state government.

That happened in 39 states last election for every one that wanted to vote for Evan McMullen

He was kept off the ballot because he didn't follow the prescribe procedure for getting on the ballot.

Which would be the case in Cali also.

 

[pknopp]

I'm not sure this will work because of "standing". It may have to be a candidate that gets disqualified.

Not saying this is fact, just a possibility.

Voters have standing.

That isn't how courts look at it. I don't like when they do this either but right now there hasn't been a single voter stopped from voting for anyone.

Yes, that is how courts look at it.

The law will obviously stop voters from voting for Trump.

What kind of idiot are you?

You can't sue unless you have been harmed. You can't sue because you think you might be harmed. I don't know what to tell you. That's the way it works.

They law prevents them from voting for the candidate of their choice. They are being harmed. If they made law to disallow any candidate on the ballot who didn't own at least $1 million in real property, would that harm anyone?

1. No one has been denied their right to vote. There is no election yet. As far as the courts are concerned at this point, Trump would turn over his returns. If California decides to keep him off the ballot, then he will have standing to sue.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not sure this will work because of "standing". It may have to be a candidate that gets disqualified.

Not saying this is fact, just a possibility.

Yes this is how it is always done.

Otherwise, there would have been no challenges in Bush v. Gore or a whole host of other litigation since.

.

Bush v Gore was challenged on the idea that people's votes were not being counted.

Their votes were counted three times.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Voters have standing.

That isn't how courts look at it. I don't like when they do this either but right now there hasn't been a single voter stopped from voting for anyone.

Yes, that is how courts look at it.

The law will obviously stop voters from voting for Trump.

What kind of idiot are you?

You can't sue unless you have been harmed. You can't sue because you think you might be harmed. I don't know what to tell you. That's the way it works.

They law prevents them from voting for the candidate of their choice. They are being harmed. If they made law to disallow any candidate on the ballot who didn't own at least $1 million in real property, would that harm anyone?

1. No one has been denied their right to vote. There is no election yet. As far as the courts are concerned at this point, Trump would turn over his returns. If California decides to keep him off the ballot, then he will have standing to sue.

Zone of Interest. Look it up.

.

 

[Thinker101]

Voters have standing.

That isn't how courts look at it. I don't like when they do this either but right now there hasn't been a single voter stopped from voting for anyone.

Yes, that is how courts look at it.

The law will obviously stop voters from voting for Trump.

What kind of idiot are you?

You can't sue unless you have been harmed. You can't sue because you think you might be harmed. I don't know what to tell you. That's the way it works.

They law prevents them from voting for the candidate of their choice. They are being harmed. If they made law to disallow any candidate on the ballot who didn't own at least $1 million in real property, would that harm anyone?

1. No one has been denied their right to vote. There is no election yet. As far as the courts are concerned at this point, Trump would turn over his returns. If California decides to keep him off the ballot, then he will have standing to sue.

Hence the reason why California is being sued.

 

[bripat9643]

Voters have standing.

That isn't how courts look at it. I don't like when they do this either but right now there hasn't been a single voter stopped from voting for anyone.

Yes, that is how courts look at it.

The law will obviously stop voters from voting for Trump.

What kind of idiot are you?

You can't sue unless you have been harmed. You can't sue because you think you might be harmed. I don't know what to tell you. That's the way it works.

They law prevents them from voting for the candidate of their choice. They are being harmed. If they made law to disallow any candidate on the ballot who didn't own at least $1 million in real property, would that harm anyone?

1. No one has been denied their right to vote. There is no election yet. As far as the courts are concerned at this point, Trump would turn over his returns. If California decides to keep him off the ballot, then he will have standing to sue.

You're an imbecile. You simply refuse to listen to reason. Read the opening statement. If states cannot prevent candidates from being on the ballot because they have served more than a certain number of terms, then they cannot be kept off the ballot for not submitting income tax returns.

It's open and shut.

 

[pknopp]

the way to get around having to show your tax returns is to sue Congress - fuck the voters


Analysts say most Americans want to see Trump's tax returns

Congress has no right to his tax returns, so your claim is patently false.

you do know Trump is suing Congress dont you ?

If Trump is kept off a ballot, he can indeed sue.

he is even if he's still on the ballot -

Trump Sues House Panel, New York Officials to Protect State Tax Returns

He can do that. He will likely IMO win.

 

[pknopp]

the way to get around having to show your tax returns is to sue Congress - fuck the voters


Analysts say most Americans want to see Trump's tax returns

Congress has no right to his tax returns, so your claim is patently false.

you do know Trump is suing Congress dont you ?

If Trump is kept off a ballot, he can indeed sue.

The voters can also sue, moron.

When they are denied. They have no been yet.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

the way to get around having to show your tax returns is to sue Congress - fuck the voters


Analysts say most Americans want to see Trump's tax returns

Congress has no right to his tax returns, so your claim is patently false.

you do know Trump is suing Congress dont you ?

If Trump is kept off a ballot, he can indeed sue.

he is even if he's still on the ballot -

Trump Sues House Panel, New York Officials to Protect State Tax Returns

He can do that. He will likely IMO win.

You're still arguing that voters don't have standing?

.

 

[bripat9643]

Will be fun to watch this go through the system.

It may not make it through the courts, and may be dismissed, because those suing are not harmed??? AND because according to the constitution, aren't States given the power to set the parameters/rules of their own elections???

Of course they are harmed. They are being prevented from voting for the candidate of their choice because of some arbitrary whim of the state government.

That happened in 39 states last election for every one that wanted to vote for Evan McMullen

He was kept off the ballot because he didn't follow the prescribe procedure for getting on the ballot.

Which would be the case in Cali also.

This criteria is not of the same category as "you didn't get the required number of signatures on your application." This is of the nature of "your skin is the wrong color" or "you don't own any property."