Posted on 07/30/2019 5:03:13 PM PDT by SMGFan
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill Tuesday requiring all presidential candidates, including President Donald Trump, to fork over their tax returns if they wish to appear on the state's primary election ballot.
“As one of the largest economies in the world and home to one in nine Americans eligible to vote, California has a special responsibility to require this information of presidential and gubernatorial candidates,” Newsom said in a statement.
While the law is expected to be challenged, Trump could sidestep its requirement by not competing in the California primary. With little competition for the Republican Party nomination, Trump could still secure the nomination without running in the Golden State.
The president's personal attorney, Jay Sekulow, responded to the passing of the California law, saying Trump expects to challenge it in court.
"The State of California’s attempt to circumvent the Constitution will be answered in court," Sekulow said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
He must be high on the wacky weed to think he has that sort of power.
Time for Gov. Gavin to experience the joys of joining Gray Davis. #sarc
They can “require” no such thing. Newsome is pandering to the Hollyweirdos and other crazies.
Trump is fixing our economy, recognizing and addressing pervasive historic government corruption while working pro bono
Gavin newsome is running California into the ground at a level that would make former and current Baltimore mayors swoon.
So who is the party of voter suppression
Gavin Newsom is a COMPLETE DUMBA$$!
Yeah this is getting great.
He’s Fredo.
“I’m SMOT. Not like everybody says, like DUMB!! I’m SMOT and i’m the governor of CA AND I WANT RESPECT!!”
This remains a terrible, anti-democratic idea and California should be embarassed.
If any politician tries to restrict who you can vote for when they meet Constitutional requirements for the office, you should vote them out of office while you still have the chance.
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1156262497755770880
So any state can set eligibility requirements for appearing on the presidential ballot? Ok. I wanted to see Obama’s birth certificate! (Think that Newsome thought this all the way through?)
Isn’t this a bill of attainder?
Could nuthin’. It’s blatant partisan BS that won’t pass the muster. Anyone with a brain and morals knows this.
Sounds very banana republic, you are only allowed to vote for the party in control.
“Cal. Gov. Gavin Newsom signs bill that could require President Trump to release his tax returns.”
That actually came from a news room. “Could.” I think it is time for ABC to shut down their news division and merge what little talent there is to it entertainment division.
Governor Newsom can kiss my butt. No unit of government has this authority over anyone. It is a bill of attainder, therefore, unconstitutional.
F California. Their vote will be overwhelmingly go for the communist.
to save others the time
A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder or bill of pains and penalties) is an act of a legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them, often without a trial. As with attainder resulting from the normal judicial process, the effect of such a bill is to nullify the targeted person’s civil rights,
No it can’t. This was settled at the federal level.
Maybe what should be done is for all Cali votes to be declared null and void with zero electoral votes due to voter suppression by the governor and other pols in CA. That should fix this little problem nicely.
California is home to more than 1 in 9 ELIGIBLE VOTERS???
I THINK NOT! Now, if you want to talk about all those illegals voting openly in California, I’m hoping ICE has a large presence all over California on Election Day 2020.
The United States Constitution forbids legislative bills of attainder: in federal law under Article I, Section 9, and in state law under Article I, Section 10. The fact that they were banned even under state law reflects the importance that the framers attached to this issue.
Within the U.S. Constitution, the clauses forbidding attainder laws serve two purposes. First, they reinforced the separation of powers, by forbidding the legislature to perform judicial or executive functions—since the outcome of any such acts of legislature would of necessity take the form of a bill of attainder. Second, they embody the concept of due process, which was partially reinforced by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The text of the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 3 is “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.