California Gov Signs Bill To Exclude Trump From 2020 Election Ballot (SP 27)

[Shadow Wolf]

I didn't mention the primary.

From the OP link:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California’s Democratic governor signed a law Tuesday requiring presidential candidates to release their tax returns to appear on the state’s primary ballot

I suspected people weren't reading it. And laws in regards to primaries are so loose and shaky as it is it would be an uphill battle to prove it illegal.

Do you think the USSC would notice that CA intends to
specifically prevent Trump from being on the ballot?

It would have to be proven, with supporting evidence, that it would only apply to Trump. Courts can be, after all, notoriously picky in requiring specifics to be demonstrated and reasonably proved. Looking at the bill, strictly speaking, we can't reasonably assume it is solely aimed at Trump. We "know" it is, but how do you objectively demonstrate that in court?

 

[Revoltingest]

It would have to be proven, with supporting evidence, that it would only apply to Trump.

No, they wouldn't need that unless they deem it needed.

 

[Ellen Brown]

How did you manage to be subject to the draft...which I gather from your post?

As for avoiding the draft...that's a wise thing to do.
I give Trump credit for not submitting to that evil.

I've been open about my past, or had you forgotten? I was forced to live as a male until 2004 when I could not stand it any more. I am XXY non-Kleinfelter's, AIS and who knows what else. That makes me Intersex, but that was not discovered until later in life. So, yes I was drafted in 1966. I was this little, scared kid who feared authority. That is another story. I was 5'7" and 135 lbs when I went into the Army. By the time I got out of the service in 1969, I feared and hated men, and still avoid any sort of intimate contact.

I was married for 39 years, and never being thought to be masculine enough was painful and I was often thought to be gay, or worse. I was always employed and never adulterous. I tried to satisfy a very conservative Evangelical church. In the end it is they who were the jerks.

Twits like Trump and his evil minions see me as something repugnant. Yes, I can be verbally abusive. You come by that when you manage to survive.

Is that enough for you???

 

[Ellen Brown]

Indeed. He obtained a deferment due to being enrolled in college as was his right. Vietnam was an illegal war He had every right not to participate in that evil, as you said.

You are leaving out some facts. I am terminating this conversation.

 

[Revoltingest]

I've been open about my past, or had you forgotten?

If I ever knew it, I'd forgotten it.

I was forced to live as a male until 2004 when I could not stand it any more. I am XXY non-Kleinfelter's, AIS and who knows what else. That makes me Intersex, but that was not discovered until later in life. So, yes I was drafted in 1966. I was this little, scared kid who feared authority. That is another story. I was 5'7" and 135 lbs when I went into the Army. By the time I got out of the service in 1969, I feared and hated men, and still avoid any sort of intimate contact.

I was married for 39 years, and never being thought to be masculine enough was painful and I was often thought to be gay, or worse. I was always employed and never adulterous. I tried to satisfy a very conservative Evangelical church. In the end it is they who were the jerks.

Twits like Trump and his evil minions see me as something repugnant. Yes, I can be verbally abusive. You come by that when you manage to survive.

Is that enough for you???

Hey, I was just asking out of curiosity.
For a woman to be drafted is highly unusual in Ameristan.
But yes, that is sufficient.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No, they wouldn't need that unless they deem it needed.

Courts function on evidence. Reasonable doubt, burden of proof, and all that stuff. You can't, theoretically at least, just go into court and say something and expect a favorable ruling without evidence.

 

[Revoltingest]

Courts function on evidence. Reasonable doubt, burden of proof, and all that stuff. You can't, theoretically at least, just go into court and say something and expect a favorable ruling without evidence.

Courts also use stare decisis, legislation, & the Constitution.
Evidence: Californiastan's law

 

[fantome profane]

Well of course.
However, the point being, they're not actually entitled to vote.

And they can’t, not even in California. And no legitimate news source would tell you different.

 

[fantome profane]

What? Are you crazy?

I wouldn't. Even without something to hide, I'd suspect the opposition would find a way to make a mountain out of a molehill.

No doubt, Trump has plenty of questionable shenanigans with his taxes dealing with that much money. Why offer the Democrats more ammo?

Bet you a cookie that the Democratic candidate will release his or her tax returns.

Why shouldn’t the Republican candidate do likewise?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Constitution & legislation are tough reading.
But it appears that illegals get representation.
Supreme Court rules in redistricting case: Illegal immigrants can be counted

I am not denying that at all. But I can see Trump trying to get a law written by Congress, along with his stacking of the Supreme Court to get this sort of ruling overturned. I don't see him succeeding at it, but it is a worry.

 

[Enoch07]

That was prohibited straight from the start with the First Amendment.

Uh huh what about those states rights though?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Courts also use stare decisis, legislation, & the Constitution.
Evidence: Californiastan's law

States and each party in the state are allowed to make their own rules. Such as during the last election season, the Republicans requested the candidates sign a pledge that if they didn't win the primary they wouldn't run third party. States can have open or closed primaries. They also get to set laws on who and how to get on the ballot.

 

[SugarOcean]

And they can’t, not even in California. And no legitimate news source would tell you different.

US Supreme Court Strikes Down Proof of Citizenship Voting Law | Colorlines

..."This morning the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship from residents as they register to vote is invalid because it violates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Through the NVRA, a standardized federal form is provided to all states to keep voter registration uniform across the nation."


Federal Voter Registration Form Block 6

• Box 6 — ID Number Federal law requires that states collect from each registrant an identification number. You must refer to your state's specific instructions for item 6 regarding information on what number is acceptable for your state. If you have neither a drivers license nor a social security number, please indicate this on the form and a number will be assigned to you by your state.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am not denying that at all. But I can see Trump trying to get a law written by Congress, along with his stacking of the Supreme Court to get this sort of ruling overturned. I don't see him succeeding at it, but it is a worry.

Why worry about illegal aliens getting representation in Congress?

 

[Twilight Hue]

California governor signs bill on presidential tax returns

The bill is unconstitutional under California state and the federal Constitution.
There are no tax return requirements under the federal Constitution and the supremacy clause makes the federal Constitution the supreme law of the land. This is a sorry political move.

Should be interesting to watch what happens to this illegal law.

Don't expect the Socialist Democrats to play fair. They never did and never will.

Trump ought to revoke the citizenship of these people because they don't deserve to be called American by way of their attitudes and actions which certainly doesn't reflect the value of freedom and liberty for everyone. They're Traitors.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Uh huh what about those states rights though?

With the example you provided, America was established as a secular nation and multiple times the Constitution prohibits the merging of state and government. Such as, any and all state laws that require a pledge of faith to hold public office are prohibited per the Constitution.

 

[Revoltingest]

States and each party in the state are allowed to make their own rules.

There are limits.
I don't think the USSC would allow such as CA proposes.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There are limits.
I don't think the USSC would allow such as CA proposes.

It would probably be better resolved by addressing the seemingly arbitrary and random nature of primary elections overall and making them abit more stream lined, especially given presidential state primaries do concern a federal election. And, certainly, showing your tax forms is far less burdensome than many other requirements that various states have.

 

[Twilight Hue]

US Supreme Court Strikes Down Proof of Citizenship Voting Law | Colorlines

..."This morning the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship from residents as they register to vote is invalid because it violates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Through the NVRA, a standardized federal form is provided to all states to keep voter registration uniform across the nation."


Federal Voter Registration Form Block 6

• Box 6 — ID Number Federal law requires that states collect from each registrant an identification number. You must refer to your state's specific instructions for item 6 regarding information on what number is acceptable for your state. If you have neither a drivers license nor a social security number, please indicate this on the form and a number will be assigned to you by your state.

Boy that opens the door to just about everybody and anybody.

Native Americans are given, they are citizens by birth.

Latinos are fine as long as they have citizenship , which is why I think it was instituted in the first place.

I really think there is a concentrated effort by socialist Democrats to destroy this country via undocumented foreigners who clearly have no business in politics.

2013 that was during the Obama regime.

 

[SugarOcean]

Don't expect the Socialist Democrats to play fair. They never did and never will.

Trump ought to revoke the citizenship of these people because they don't deserve to be called American by way of their attitudes and actions which certainly doesn't reflect the value of freedom and liberty for everyone. They're Traitors.

During this presidency we've witnessed many traitors and seditionists on the left become very public about their betrayal of this nation and its rule of law.
They'll never be held accountable. As I said prior in a different thread, when BHO and HRC left the White house without handcuffs on it was a glaring reality check for many. Those who betray this country publicly do so because they know they're untouchable by the rule of law.
It is especially egregious an offense against America and our citizens that BHO, his America hating spouse, and HRC, all wrote books afterward gloating about their time in office.
Those three make me wish the traditional idea of Hell, fire brimstone, did exist so they could reap their justice after the life they lived richly by committing innumerable injustices under the color of authority.