Replies

You did not answer the question. Those cases all had to do with local rules and procedures being followed or not. Not injury to opposing candidates, even though they might be the ones challenging access. (Although I suspect more often it's a would be candidate challenging lack of access under those rules as applied by the state or locality).

So again, what injury would McCain have suffered that would allow him to have challenged Obama's Constitutional eligibility? He, McCain was on the ballot, people could vote for him, even though they chose not to. No harm, no foul?

"You did not answer the question. Those cases all had to do with local rules and procedures being followed or not. Not injury to opposing candidates, even though they might be the ones challenging access."

First, many of these kinds of cases fall to specific eligibility requirements of the candidates themselves. For instance, an opponent may challenge that another candidate hasn't met the residency requirements specified in a state or local law. While signatures on petitions are the most common grounds for these challenges, they aren't the only grounds for challenges on ballot access.

Be that as it may, McCain's "injury" in last years election, or the injury in any other election contest would most likely be based in the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. In other words, the challenger would argue, "If an eligibility requirement applies to me, it must also equally apply to my opponent." That would easily meet the requirement of specific and unique injury that a plaintiff must meet for a case to be heard.