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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: NJ to pass law requiring tax return release [View all]Gothmog
(181,245 posts)30. Politics How States Could Force Trump to Release His Tax Returns
I volunteer a great deal of time on voter protection issues and have been in war rooms the last five or so elections. Prof. Hasen has a good blog on election law and he believes that these laws are constitutional. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/donald-trump-tax-returns-release-214950
The answer lies in another part of Article IIthe part that received some important attention in Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court decision that Democrats love to hate. Famously, the 2000 case between Republican nominee George W. Bush and Democratic nominee Al Gore effectively handed the election to Bush when it ended the Florida recount.
Article II provides that the state legislature may direct the manner for choosing presidential electors. In Bush v. Gore, the Court stated that this Article II power given to state legislatures was plenary, meaning that the states have a broad power when it comes to presidential elections. Indeed, the Court wrote that even though state legislators have given each states voters the right to vote for presidential electors, at any time a state legislature can take back the power to appoint electors. In other words, if the California or Texas state legislature wanted to directly choose the states presidential electors in 2020, the state could do so. As Dean Vik Amar notes, the Constitution does not necessarily include a right of Americans to vote for president at all (and American citizens in U.S. territories do not have this right).
The logic then goes like this: If a state legislature can take back from the voters the right to vote at all for president, it may be able to use ballot-access laws to limit the candidate choices presented to voters. And doing so would not impinge on the Qualifications Clause in Article II because Congress ultimately counts the Electoral College votes and can police that Clause. If a state legislature, for example, chose electors supporting a candidate under the age of 35, the U.S. House of Representatives, which counts the Electoral College votes, could disregard those votes after deeming the underage candidate unqualified.
Prof. Hasen has some concerns about the wisdom of these laws and possible GOP retaliation if blue states adopt these laws. I also believe that these laws are valid
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
45 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
I'm sure it will get challenged in court. Being that the Constitution leaves elections
SFnomad
Feb 2019
#3
Those are the *minimum* requirements. I don't see any reason why Congress or states
The Velveteen Ocelot
Feb 2019
#27