no tax return, no place on ballot

[Harpy Eagle]

Wrong. They are adding a requirement to run for President. If the founders wanted states to make their own requirements, they would have stated so in the Constitution. The state of Commie Fornia decided to change the requirements which is unconstitutional, and they know it.

No, the person can still run for president, they are not stopping them. You are just making things up.

 

[Siete]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

No, the state cannot pass such a law. The requirements to be a President of the United States are outlined in the US Constitution. No state can change that by adding on to it without a constitutional amendment.

Democrats still plugging up our courts with childish bullshit that will never work.

pretend Trump isnt suing congress to cover his fat ass -

Suing Congress for what? What does that have to do with my reply?

ok, you really are that dumb -

Trump sues House Ways and Means panel to block disclosure of his tax returns

 

[Harpy Eagle]

sounds good to me -

Trump’s tax returns required under new California election law

Unconstitutional.

what part of the Constitution is it violating?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

No, the state cannot pass such a law. The requirements to be a President of the United States are outlined in the US Constitution. No state can change that by adding on to it without a constitutional amendment.

Democrats still plugging up our courts with childish bullshit that will never work.

They did not change the requirements to be a President of the United States, they added a rule to be on their ballot.

A rule that changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. The requirements cannot be changed, subtracted or added to short of an amendment.

Unconstitutional.

 

[Rambunctious]

I guess CA officials are worried about Trump turning the state Red.....

 

[Dick Foster]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

No, the state cannot pass such a law. The requirements to be a President of the United States are outlined in the US Constitution. No state can change that by adding on to it without a constitutional amendment.

Democrats still plugging up our courts with childish bullshit that will never work.

They did not change the requirements to be a President of the United States, they added a rule to be on their ballot. There are already rules to get on any state ballot. The question will be is this any different from those, since those are all allowed by the courts.

How did you manage to get so damb dense in such a short amount of time? It takes nature thousands even millions of years to create that kind of density.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong. They are adding a requirement to run for President. If the founders wanted states to make their own requirements, they would have stated so in the Constitution. The state of Commie Fornia decided to change the requirements which is unconstitutional, and they know it.

No, the person can still run for president, they are not stopping them. You are just making things up.

No, what they are saying is HE CAN'T run for President in their state. Again, totally unconstitutional.

That's like my state saying before the Romney election, all contenders must provide their college transcripts and original birth certificate. Do you think my state would have been able to do that for DumBama's reelection?

 

[Rambunctious]

Do any of you libs know how many law suits against Trump California has won?....zero...not a single case...but the cost to California tax payers and illegal aliens is through the roof.....

 

[Harpy Eagle]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

No, the state cannot pass such a law. The requirements to be a President of the United States are outlined in the US Constitution. No state can change that by adding on to it without a constitutional amendment.

Democrats still plugging up our courts with childish bullshit that will never work.

They did not change the requirements to be a President of the United States, they added a rule to be on their ballot.

A rule that changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. The requirements cannot be changed, subtracted or added to short of an amendment.

Unconstitutional.

They did not changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. They added a rule to be on their ballot. Every state already has rules to be on their ballot that are not in the Constitution.

 

[Blackrook]

Why not pass a law that no one with a last name starting with "T" can be on the ballot?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

sounds good to me -

Trump’s tax returns required under new California election law

so Californa will ignore the voters that would have voted for the president?
Around here we call that voter suppression.

 

[Rambunctious]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

No, the state cannot pass such a law. The requirements to be a President of the United States are outlined in the US Constitution. No state can change that by adding on to it without a constitutional amendment.

Democrats still plugging up our courts with childish bullshit that will never work.

They did not change the requirements to be a President of the United States, they added a rule to be on their ballot.

A rule that changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. The requirements cannot be changed, subtracted or added to short of an amendment.

Unconstitutional.

They did not changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. They added a rule to be on their ballot. Every state already has rules to be on their ballot that are not in the Constitution.

SCOTUS would fast track this right into the gutter...where it belongs....

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, what they are saying is HE CAN'T run for President in their state. Again, totally unconstitutional.

No, they are saying he cannot be on their ballot. Right now Cali has a list of requirements to be on their ballot, which is why there is not 100 people on it running for POTUS each election. Are all of those requirements unconstitutional?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

No, the state cannot pass such a law. The requirements to be a President of the United States are outlined in the US Constitution. No state can change that by adding on to it without a constitutional amendment.

Democrats still plugging up our courts with childish bullshit that will never work.

They did not change the requirements to be a President of the United States, they added a rule to be on their ballot.

A rule that changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. The requirements cannot be changed, subtracted or added to short of an amendment.

Unconstitutional.

They did not changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. They added a rule to be on their ballot. Every state already has rules to be on their ballot that are not in the Constitution.

It's not a rule, it's a requirement they created, totally on partisan commie grounds. HIs tax returns have absolutely zero to do with him being President. This is grade school stuff.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

sounds good to me -

Trump’s tax returns required under new California election law

Unconstitutional.

what part of the Constitution is it violating?

Article II, Section 1.

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

Those are the requirements. Arbitrary requirements cannot be added short of an amendment.

 

[Siete]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

No, the state cannot pass such a law. The requirements to be a President of the United States are outlined in the US Constitution. No state can change that by adding on to it without a constitutional amendment.

Democrats still plugging up our courts with childish bullshit that will never work.

They did not change the requirements to be a President of the United States, they added a rule to be on their ballot.

A rule that changes the constitutionally-mandated requirements for president. The requirements cannot be changed, subtracted or added to short of an amendment.

Unconstitutional.

Interpreting the high court's ruling six years later, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared a California law unconstitutional for "creating an absolute bar to candidates, who otherwise meet the requirements of the Qualifications Clause."

Many expect judges would apply the same logic for the presidency. But courts have also upheld several so-called "ballot access" rules in primary elections, finding that states have a "right to regulate elections by imposing reasonable requirements on candidates."

 

[Crixus]

sounds good to me -

Trump’s tax returns required under new California election law

Same for congress to right?

 

[JusticeHammer]

sounds good to me -

Trump’s tax returns required under new California election law

Typical stupidity out of commieforia. Let's pass a law to force obuthole to release his records. Idiot dimwits are the stupidest.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, what they are saying is HE CAN'T run for President in their state. Again, totally unconstitutional.

No, they are saying he cannot be on their ballot. Right now Cali has a list of requirements to be on their ballot, which is why there is not 100 people on it running for POTUS each election. Are all of those requirements unconstitutional?

Yes, go ahead. Give me a new requirement that any state has in force beyond the constitution that would prevent a person running for President.

 

[JusticeHammer]

This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.

Democrats complain about rigging elections while they try to rig the election right out in front of everyone.

Because they are hypocritical lying scum.