Posted on 04/13/2019 8:46:31 AM PDT by rktman
Donald Trump will have to release five years of tax returns if he wants appear on the Illinois 2020 presidential ballot, the state’s senate has ruled.
The bill, which still requires approval by the Prairie State’s House of Representatives, comes amid a growing row in Washington over Mr Trump’s unprecedented refusal to make publicly available his income tax returns.
The US Treasury ignored a congressional deadline to release the documents earlier this week. Treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin claimed the request by the House ways and means committee was “politically motivated”.
Mr Trump himself has claimed that he cannot release his tax returns because they are under audit, although technically there is nothing preventing him from doing so.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
< “As for going to court. State legislatures can award their electoral votes any way they wish.”
Absolutely false. Legislatures NEVER award electoral votes.
The 12th and 20th Amendments govern the EC.
There is a SLATE of Electors for each presidential candidate chosen by either the state legislature or a political party. Therefore, there are multiple slates of Electors before Election Day.
In ALL but two states, Nebraska and Maine, the slate of Electors of the political party whose voters win the state’s popular votes advance to be certified by the state as the state’s Electors.
The state can only revoke certification of a faithless Elector causing the prevailing political party to nominate a replacement.
Case law allows states to decertify and/or punish a faithless Elector, never a faithful Elector.
A court case against the State of Illinois regarding failure to place Donald J. Trump on the ballot would pursue a wrongful shutout of the Republican Party in the Presidential Election. The Party has the absolute right to nominate a candidate of its choosing according to the US Constitution’s natural born, age and residency requirements. There is NO REQUIREMENT whatsoever that a nominee’s private tax records be part of eligibility. If Illinois wants Trump’s tax returns before allowing him on the state ballot, they will have to amend the US Constitution with the backing of 37 other states for ratification; NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Donald J. Trump is eligible period by clear constitutional authority. The State of Illinois has no say in his eligibility outside the US Constitution.
EVEN IF the State of Illinois engaged in such nonsense as to keep Donald J. Trump off their state ballot, then a popular vote for a phantom Republican candidate would mandate that the Republican Electors be advanced and certified to the Electoral College where they would promptly and dutifully vote for their party’s nominee which will be Donald Trump. But the State of Illinois will never get this far as it is certain the US Supreme Court will rule that Donald Trump is eligible and cannot be denied by an unconstitutional state law that attempts to modify his eligibility outside the Constitution.
Cool!! Illinois electoral votes will not be counted.
Disallow the electoral votes from Illinois, and refuse to seat their elected representatives in the House and Senate.
Remember the crap they tried to pull in ‘16. The Government spying on his campaign, recounts in states that President Trump narrowly won—but not Minnesota or New Hampshire. TV ads begging for Trump Electors to not vote for him as pledged. Then the 25th Amendment, impeachment, and it keeps going on. It’s got to stop, but I don’t know how to stop it.
The presidential election is different. Voters do not vote for the candidate, they vote for party electors. The candidate’s name appears on the ballot only for convenience. The winning electors cast ballots in the electoral college, and THOSE ballots have the candidate’s name.
“Where is a Republican legislature that says illegal supporters and baby killers are not allowed on the ballot?”
The GOP is pro-illegal immigration and squishy verging on pro-abortion.
The US Supreme Court shall rule that the State of Illinois law barring the Republican Nominee for President of the United States in effect attempts to change eligibility requirements set forth in the US Constitution and therefore is unconstitutional on its face. The state law will be stricken leaving Illinois with no legal authority to deny the state’s Republican nominee Donald J. Trump his place on the ballot.
Donald Trump will be on the ballot in the State of Illinois.
The US Senate is very much involved in the procedural process of certifying the EC votes, but that is moot as the USSC will never allow a state to modify the US Constitution to its liking without formal amendment ratification effecting the same.
12 Amendment:
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; ...
Article II, section 1: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:
The 12th Amendment recognized the role of political parties and changed the idea of the VP being the man who came in 2nd in the Electoral College vote, and mandated separate ballots for President and VP
The 20th Amendment changed the dates of Presidential inauguration and the beginning of the new Congress. It also deals with what happens if the President-elect should die before taking office.
Neither amendment changes Art. II Sec. 1.
Donald Trump will be on the ballot in the State of Illinois.
The State of Illinois already has its laws in effect regarding the manner in which electors are appointed.
That is not the issue
The issue is whether Donald J. Trump can be kept off the state ballot by a state legislative action and the answer is a resounding No!
Trump can only be denied ballot access by proving he does not meet the requirements for candidacy as set forth in the US Constitution. The State of Illinois has no control over the US Constitution’s eligibility criteria for President.
The State of Illinois already has its laws in effect regarding the manner in which electors are appointed.
Don’t misunderstand. I think it’s a terrible idea—and it’s an ‘in-your-face Republicans, we don’t care what you think’ kind of move—we’re in charge now and we’ll do what we want. It may even help us show the depth of hatred they have for us deplorables.
Lincoln won 212 of 233 electoral college votes.
The ballot access actions of the slave states were among hundreds of defiant actions they took in futility.
The slave states defiance ushered in a bloody senseless war.
The slave states were punished beyond anything they could imagine with the lingering effects of punishment remaining strong into the 20th Century.
The State of Illinois will be punished with a different type of war, a constitutional, judicial, and executive war that will leave disastrous effects on that State’s leftist ideologues one way or another.
Your point is irrelevant; twisted out of context, STATES DO NOT RULE THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION PERIOD. They have limited participation only.
> “And they are proposing to change those laws.”
The title of this thread concerns tax returns and ballot access.
You are off topic.
“I thought the Constitution gave the requirements for Presidential qualifications”
These state laws are not changing Presidential eligibility requirements.
They are simply changing the methods the states in question are using to appoint their Electors.
Declare Illinois person non grata and don’t count the state’s vote.
What are these weenies gonna do - cry?
So what?
“And they are proposing to change those laws.”
The title of this thread concerns tax returns and ballot access.
You are off topic.
It appears as if we have one election for President every four years, but in truth we have 51 elections for President. There are some federal-level restraints on the states, but the states are running the elections within their borders. There were loads of Presidential candidates on the California ballot that did not appear on my Missouri ballot.
The Democrats have chosen to believe that they will win a Civil War. They will not be persuaded otherwise and for this reason, there is no limit to what they will do to remove President Trump.
Of course, they would prefer that their opponents surrender to rigged elections under a Pretense-of-Law. But Congressman Swalwell (D-California) openly threatened to use nuclear weapons on American citizens if they refuse to obey the Democrats demand for confiscation of firearms. This can be dismissed as a hyperbole. But everybody knows what he meant.
Once Rule-of-Law is gone, there are no limits for anybody.
Once Rule-of-Law is gone, there are no limits for anybody.
California is outraged that for a week Californians could legally buy firearm magazines that are standard capacity in most states. Blue states are passing laws forbidding purchase of firearms by adult 18-20 year-olds while Red states are passing Constitutional carry laws. It seems that there is no middle ground.
I fear for the Republic.
Yep...
We can’t ask for IDs, but they can keep names off the ballet?
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.