[Seizethecarp]

“(e) If the applicant, or any other party, individual, or group with a candidate on the presidential ballot, objects to the finding of eligibility or disqualification the person may, not later than 4:30 p.m. on the fifth day after the finding,”

Um...the qualifying phrase for “individual” in this sentence is “with a candidate on the presidential ballot,” so only an individual “on the presidential ballot” (presumably in HI) would have standing to contest the eligibility of another candidate on that ballet, IMO.

Any HI FReepers in HI inclined to run for POTUS in HI?

[frog in a pot]

If I recall correctly from 4 years ago, New Jersey may have effective language for contesting a candidate at the primary level (although it provides for a very narrow time frame).

[edge919]

I'm not sure if you necessarily have to have a candidate on the ballot in order to object to a finding of eligibility. It makes sense you would need to have such a candidate to object to that candidate being disqualified, but no candidate is going to object to a finding of their own eligibility. Even so, one could become a bona fide member of your state's political party organization in order to claim that you have a candidate on the presidential ballot in order to file an objection against Obama's inclusion on the ballot.

The trickiest part of this is the short window for being able to challenge the finding of eligibility to put a candidate's name on the ballot. IIUC, the law in Hawaii was basically from the 60th day to the 45th day prior to election day (or something like that).