HEY CALI: Your Electoral Ballot Stunt Stumbled, Judge’s Early Ruling Favors Trump

Written by Wes Walker on September 20, 2019

California has been leading the ‘resistance’ since inauguration, but they lost yet ANOTHER court decision to their Nemesis.

That epic battle against ‘Orange Man Bad’ isn’t going so well, is it? Trump has been racking up some wins.

Not only has the 9th Circut ruled against their opposition to Trump’s Amnesty solution, and that opposition to his ‘travel bans’ flopped, but now there is a ruling on their stunt to require the tax forms of anyone whose name is on the ballot.

And the Left won’t like it.

Trending: AG Barr’s Speech To Notre Dame Rips The Mask Off The Progressive Agenda

At issue is the question of whether an individual State has the Constitutional authority to make local requirements on Presidential candidates beyond the ones already in force nationally.

A federal judge ordered a temporary injunction Thursday against California’s first-in-the-nation law requiring candidates to disclose their tax returns for a spot on the presidential primary ballot, an early victory for President Trump but a decision that will undoubtedly be appealed by state officials.
U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England Jr. said he would issue a final ruling by the end of the month but took the unusual step of issuing the tentative order from the bench. He said there would be “irreparable harm without temporary relief” for Trump and other candidates from the law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in July.

England spent much of the court proceeding on the question of whether a long-standing federal financial disclosure law preempts any additional rules that a state could impose. The federal law, known as the Ethics in Government Act, or EIGA, was originally passed in 1978 and applies to a range of top federal officials. Trump has filed the required annual report, which provides an overview of his finances, most recently in May.

The final decision isn’t due to be handed down until October 1. But his council Harmeet Dillon stated on an TV interview that ‘we were able to convince the judge that this law … was unconstitutional on a number of different grounds and it issued an injunction.’

But this is yet another setback, and it’s starting to look like a pattern.

Related…

SCOTUS Overrules 9th Circut Regarding Trump’s Asylum Solution
BUSTED: Look What We Discovered About Judge Who BLOCKED Trump’s Travel Ban

SUCH BS: Judge Who BLOCKED Trump’s Travel Ban Is Buddies With This CROOKED LIBERAL

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.