I believe this is correct. The Constitution does not provide any mechanism for judicial review of a candidate's qualifications.
The original mechanism was the Electoral College, which was supposed to actually decide who became president. When the EC instantly deteriorated into a nullity there was no mechanism in place to replace it.
Any state could require a candidate to provide appropriate documentation to be on the ballot (it would only take one state), but I believe none has. In four years. A very sad commentary on our political system.
“federal law precludes this court from determining whether a candidate for the office of President of the United States is qualified under Article Two Section Five of the United States Constitution.”
If you believe this to be correct, please help me understand the legal thinking. Exactly what federal law “precludes” a State court from hearing this case? If it is correct in some contexts, is this statement actually relevant to the case at hand (State ballot access is clearly a matter of State law?). It seems a bit of a “red-herring of straw.”
That the Constitution does not provide any mechanism for judicial review of a client’s qualifications, is not the same as the quoted assertion that federal law precludes such review.
Your last statement is all too true.