In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" respondent Anderson et al. claims that states right to deny access to the ballot of Presidential elections does not add additional qualification for the office

Claim

Name

Types

Claim

Broader claims

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" respondent Anderson et al. claims that states have the right to deny access to the ballot of US Presidential elections

Opposing arguments

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" Donald Trump claims that the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling on "Anderson v Griswold" violates Term Limits by adding a new qualification for the presidency be “qualified” under Section 3 of 14th Amendment of US constitution not only on the dates that he holds office, but also on the dates of the primary and general elections

Quotes that support the claim

This case does not implicate U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995). While that case held that states could not add an “additional qualification” for office, the Court clarified that its holding did not cast doubt on states’ ability to enforce qualifications in the Constitution, expressly including “§ 3 of the 14th Amendment.” Id. at 787 n.2, 835–36. v

Referenced by

In Supreme Court case "Anderson v Trump" Donald Trump claims that the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling on "Anderson v Griswold" violates Term Limits by adding a new qualification for the presidency be “qualified” under Section 3 of 14th Amendment of US constitution not only on the dates that he holds office, but also on the dates of the primary and general elections

US Politics

Claim

This case does not implicate U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995). While that case held that states could not add an “additional qualification” for office, the Court clarified that its holding did not cast doubt on states’ ability to enforce qualifications in the Constitution, expressly including “§ 3 of the 14th Amendment.” Id. at 787 n.2, 835–36. v

US Politics

Quote