I don't think there is a constitutional argument there. The issue is fraud on the public.
-- It is possible that this may only be litigated by someone running in the general. --
Whether and when a court takes it up is up to the court. The way I see it, both the primary and general demand ballot integrity. The alternative is don't have a primary, which is how business was conducted before 1921.
-- I sometimes wonder what if the primary candidate were 32 years old rather than 35? Same answer? --
Funny thing there, eh? Election commissions suddenly find themselves competent. There have been cases of underage candidates being denied ballot access.
I think it is a fraud against the public, but the courts have dismissed for lack of standing before.