General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Forget the 14th Amendment. Here's a foolproof solution to keeping Trump from running again: [View all]StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Last edited Mon Feb 15, 2021, 01:44 AM - Edit history (1)
California tried this and the state Supreme Court threw it out. The state made this a condition of potential candidates getting on the ballot and running in the primaries. The Court ruled that this amounted to an additional qualification beyond the qualifications set forth in the Constitution (natural born citizen, 35 years old, residency) and, therefore, it was invalid.
This is different and doesn't raise a Constitutional issue. In requiring that candidates file financial disclosures, Congress and the FEC are not setting any conditions for a candidate to run or become president and don't make disclosing certain financial information a prerequisite to running or serving. They're just saying that, if someone DOES run, they must do certain things after they become a candidate and one of those things is to regularly file reports disclosing their finances. If they fail to do these things, they'll have to pay a fine, but that won't keep them from running or serving.
Requiring a candidate to include their tax returns as part of such a financial disclosure, by the same token, would not be an additional qualification or condition for getting on a ballot or running for or becoming president. Just like the financial disclosure itself, it's simply a requirement that candidates must meet after they become a candidate. As such, it doesn't run afoul of the qualifications provision, as the California state law did.