New Jersey bill passed to prevent any Presidential candidate appearing on ballots unless they release tax returns (i.e. Trump)

[Sheepinator]

They passed this before, then Christie vetoed it. Now the State has a Dem Governor. I can't wait for the Criminal in Chief's tax returns to go public.

The names of candidates for President or Vice-President of the United States shall not be printed upon the ballot unless, not later than 50 days before the general election, each candidate files with the Division of Elections in the Department of State a copy of the candidate's federal income tax returns, as that term is defined in section 6103(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. s.6103), for at least the five most recent taxable years for which the candidate has filed such a return with the Internal Revenue Service.

https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bills/S0500/119_I1.HTM

https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...-2020-ballot-releases-tax-returns/2926652002/

 

[Slayven]

I wonder if it will hold up to challenge

 

[TerminusFox]

Interesting. Not sure if it's entirely constitutional, but I at least like the idea on paper.

 

[Coyote Starrk]

Sounds good to me.

 

[RDreamer]

Ball's in your court Bernie.

 

[Deleted member 19003]

Bwhaha. This is genius. Good job New Jersey!

 

[Hollywood Duo]

States rights. Trump has no chance of winning in NJ anyway so he might not even bother fighting it.

 

[MadScientist]

Interesting. Not sure if it's entirely constitutional, but I at least like the idea on paper.

Click to shrink...

Maybe not. I guess then don't run for president if you won't disclose your tax info. I think someone like the president should be as transparent as possible to show there are no conflicts of interests or to divest from those conflicts if so.

 

[Walter White Walker]

Now every other state needs to follow suit.

 

[Horns]

I'm OK with this.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

I like the idea. But I don't really like seeing individual states having so much flexibility with how federal elections are administered.

 

[Maolfunction]

Hmm, I'm real interested in how that holds up in the court system. I feel like that can't be constitutional?

 

[ASaiyan]

Interesting. This will most certainly receive a federalism challenge in the courts, and probably be struck.

Five years of tax records is also a lot. Most tax professionals I know recommend people keep at least the last three to six years of returns. But who knows how much the average person actually keeps (probably one, or zero).

 

[F34R]

It won't hold up.

 

[zma1013]

Would this prevent people from writing someone in?

 

[Soul Skater]

Don't think will hold up

What's stopping other states from arbitrarily deciding to keep candidates off the ballot for whatever reason they decide is disqualifying

Like yeah this should be disqualifying but I don't think this'll work

 

[Sheepinator]

I like the idea. But I don't really like seeing individual states having so much flexibility with how federal elections are administered.

Click to shrink...

States arguably already have too much power, given that votes in some States count for more than others. This probably won't stand up in courts, but at least it will keep the pressure on to release the tax returns that the Criminal in Chief already said he'd be happy to release. Those fucks will still claim they are "the most transparent" while fighting lawsuits to prevent being as transparent as every politician in the last 40 years.

 

[Steel]

States rights. Trump has no chance of winning in NJ anyway so he might not even bother fighting it.

Click to shrink...

Trump doesn't want to lose the popular vote, cause ego. So this'll piss him the fuck off.

 

[jack_package_200]

Ball's in your court Bernie.

Click to shrink...

Right?

 

[Damaniel]

Would this prevent people from writing someone in?

Click to shrink...

No, but plenty of people wouldn't bother.

 

[BigWinnie1]

No, but plenty of people wouldn't bother.

Click to shrink...

I wouldn't trust the leader of my country if I couldn't see atleast some of his finacials nowadays.

 

[Sheepinator]

Would this prevent people from writing someone in?

Click to shrink...

Telling the illiterate Trump voters to "leave your mark" wouldn't end up counting.

 

[TheSkullPrince]

Please follow suit, California.

 

[Damaniel]

I wouldn't trust the leader of my country if I couldn't see atleast some of his finacials nowadays.

Click to shrink...

Yep. I don't expect decades of tax returns, but it seems reasonable to me to see what stake our leaders have in the tax policies they promote. It's why I wish that Bernie would do the same - even if his taxes showed he was one of the millionaires/billionaires he wants to tax more, so what? I'd still vote for him anyway since he has a long history of being on the right side of that policy. (On the other hand, in the very unlikely case that he had been paying little/no taxes at all, then I'd definitely have a problem with that...)

 

[Deleted member 44129]

If America is able to survive Trump, then these are the kinds of changes that will happen to prevent any more Trump types coming to power.

 

[Sheepinator]

If America is able to survive Trump, then these are the kinds of changes that will happen to prevent any more Trump types coming to power.

Click to shrink...

Financial disclosure ahead of time has to be a requirement not a tradition. Clearly we can't trust a candidate or their followers to do it by themselves. We should also tighten up the rules around pardons so they can't be used to favor friends or stifle ongoing investigations in a PotuS.

 

[Pokemaniac]

Interesting. Not sure if it's entirely constitutional, but I at least like the idea on paper.

Click to shrink...

IIRC, the actual process of running elections is almost entirely up to the states. So I don't think there's much room for the federal government to resist something like this.

 

[kambaybolongo]

Ball's in your court Bernie.

Click to shrink...

only 4 posts in, that must be a new record