Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I think there's a real difference between the process requirements to get on the ballot -- filing fees, number of signatures -- and a requirement that goes to the substance of how citizens make the decision about whom to vote for. No one thinks that the filing fee or signatures are going to be material to a voter's decision. The point of the tax-return requirement is precisely that California thinks it should be material to a voter's decision about whom to elect. And the Constitution does not say that.
|
That is definitely a distinction. But "the Constitution does not say that" means very little in Constitutional law, I've discovered. Hell, people are still losing their minds over substantive due process.
You choose to focus on whether the requirement affects a voter's decision. That standard is one you made up completely (and it's not in the Constitution). My just-as-made-up standard focuses on whether the requirement constitutes a possible bar for citizens. Or, in other words, if such requirement actually runs afoul of the actual Constitutional text.
TM
Threaded Mode