If this is the correct statute, a plain reading would be that anyone who:
1) Files a declaration of candidacy;
2) Files a declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate;
3) Files a nominating petition;
4) Becomes a candidate through nomination in a primary;
5) Becomes a candidate by filing a vacancy (my guess, without reading the other part of the statute, is that this is when the candidate who won the party nomination withdraws from the race, and is replaced by another candidate)
...cannot file to run in the same race again.
As a practical matter, I don’t see how participating in a Republican party primary debate for President falls under any of the above five ways the “sore loser” law comes into effect. Unless there is some alternative case law on the subject, or this is some area of the law where the judges are under the thumb of the politicians in review of the decisions made, I suspect Husted would lose any challenge to a third-party declaration on this ground on appeal.
> I don’t see how participating in a Republican party primary debate for President falls under any of the above five ways the “sore loser” law comes into effect.
I agree. I think Husted et al is just blowing smoke.