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

[bripat9643]

I knew that was going to happen. If states can't impose term limits on members of Congress, then they can't require them to submit tax returns. The Petulant Dims believe that just because they whine about something, that means they are going to get it.

Judicial Watch Sues over California Law Requiring Presidential Candidates Appearing on Primary Ballot to Disclose Tax Returns - Judicial Watch

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of four California voters to prevent the California secretary of state from implementing a new state law requiring all presidential candidates who wish to appear on California’s primary ballot to publicly disclose their personal tax returns from the past fPoliticsive years ( Jerry Griffin et al. v. Alex Padilla (No. 2:19-cv-01477). The suit alleges that the law unconstitutionally adds a new qualification for candidates for president. Judicial Watch’s clients include a registered Independent, Republican, and Democrat California voter.​

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Will be fun to watch this go through the system.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Well, duh, everyone knew that was coming.

 

[B. Kidd]

Feds don't require tax returns in a Fed election.
Legally, there should be no way a state can disenfranchise their voters in a Federal election; unless state's rights now supersede Federal law/requirements.
And if that's the case, then Civil War 2.0 is a foregone conclusion.

 

[beautress]

I knew that was going to happen. If states can impose term limits on members of Congress, then that can't require them to submit tax returns. The Petulant Dims believe that just because they whine about something, that means they are going to get it.

Judicial Watch Sues over California Law Requiring Presidential Candidates Appearing on Primary Ballot to Disclose Tax Returns - Judicial Watch

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of four California voters to prevent the California secretary of state from implementing a new state law requiring all presidential candidates who wish to appear on California’s primary ballot to publicly disclose their personal tax returns from the past fPoliticsive years ( Jerry Griffin et al. v. Alex Padilla (No. 2:19-cv-01477). The suit alleges that the law unconstitutionally adds a new qualification for candidates for president. Judicial Watch’s clients include a registered Independent, Republican, and Democrat California voter.​

​

 

[Terri4Trump]

I knew that was going to happen. If states can't impose term limits on members of Congress, then they can't require them to submit tax returns. The Petulant Dims believe that just because they whine about something, that means they are going to get it.

Judicial Watch Sues over California Law Requiring Presidential Candidates Appearing on Primary Ballot to Disclose Tax Returns - Judicial Watch

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of four California voters to prevent the California secretary of state from implementing a new state law requiring all presidential candidates who wish to appear on California’s primary ballot to publicly disclose their personal tax returns from the past fPoliticsive years ( Jerry Griffin et al. v. Alex Padilla (No. 2:19-cv-01477). The suit alleges that the law unconstitutionally adds a new qualification for candidates for president. Judicial Watch’s clients include a registered Independent, Republican, and Democrat California voter.​

I knew that was coming. As usual Democrats spit on the constitution

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[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

 

[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?

 

[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.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I knew that was going to happen. If states can't impose term limits on members of Congress, then they can't require them to submit tax returns. The Petulant Dims believe that just because they whine about something, that means they are going to get it.

Judicial Watch Sues over California Law Requiring Presidential Candidates Appearing on Primary Ballot to Disclose Tax Returns - Judicial Watch

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of four California voters to prevent the California secretary of state from implementing a new state law requiring all presidential candidates who wish to appear on California’s primary ballot to publicly disclose their personal tax returns from the past fPoliticsive years ( Jerry Griffin et al. v. Alex Padilla (No. 2:19-cv-01477). The suit alleges that the law unconstitutionally adds a new qualification for candidates for president. Judicial Watch’s clients include a registered Independent, Republican, and Democrat California voter.​

Judicial Watch-
Doing the job Republicans Should Have Been Doing for Decades

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Feds don't require tax returns in a Fed election.
Legally, there should be no way a state can disenfranchise their voters in a Federal election; unless state's rights now supersede Federal law/requirements.
And if that's the case, then Civil War 2.0 is a foregone conclusion.

Yep, because there is NO WAY Texas would retaliate if this is allowed. NONE.


.

 

[Care4all]

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???

 

[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.

.

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[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 ?

 

[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???

That is what the courts need to decide. Is this fundamentally different than the current ballot access rules on the books.