Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: California Supreme Court says law requiring presidential candidates to turn over tax returns is inva [View all]bucolic_frolic
(43,123 posts)17. So much for states' rights
California sets rules on many things Californian. One state, TN or KY, doesn't even require vehicle inspections, but most do. So I'm not understanding it.
States have lots of requirements to get on a ballot. Number of signatures, verified, for example. States can run referendums in a manner that they choose, if they choose. There are state laws or state Constitutions that empower them to do this. Feds have nothing to do with it.
I think they should have approached this tax return requirement as part of the commerce clause. Lots of hoops to do business in California, and what is more business than running the world's largest economy?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
33 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
California Supreme Court says law requiring presidential candidates to turn over tax returns is inva [View all]
PBC_Democrat
Nov 2019
OP
I don't understand this at all (the ruling). What about the overriding concern of conflicts of ...
SWBTATTReg
Nov 2019
#1
Have no details on the rationale but if it was unanimous, then Goodwin Liu agreed.
CincyDem
Nov 2019
#3
Exactly. Not surprised at this at all. I thought it was stupid for the governor to push it. You
still_one
Nov 2019
#7
What we need is a transparency law over who provides the money to anyone that
cstanleytech
Nov 2019
#8
Yes, I was just joking about the similar name. Thanks for this info on the "other" JG. n/t
TheRickles
Nov 2019
#25
Dude, it's the Constitution. The Law of the Land. The Court had no choice in the matter.
Nitram
Nov 2019
#33