Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- First Amendment (2)
- Ballot (1)
- Ballot challenges (1)
- Briggs (1)
- Briggs v. Brown (1)
-
- California Constitution (1)
- California Law (1)
- California Supreme Court (1)
- Campaign finance (1)
- Candidate tax returns (1)
- Candidate taxes (1)
- Citizens United (1)
- Citizens United v. FEC (1)
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (1)
- Corporations (1)
- Election law (1)
- Federal Election Commission (1)
- Federal election law (1)
- Labor unions (1)
- Presidential Qualifications Clause (1)
- Prop 66 (1)
- Proposition 66 (1)
- SB 27 (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Taxes (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Alternatives To California’S Sb 27: Incentivizing The Release Of Tax Returns Without Restricting Ballot Access, Matthew Tang
Alternatives To California’S Sb 27: Incentivizing The Release Of Tax Returns Without Restricting Ballot Access, Matthew Tang
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Donald Trump is the first President since 1977, and the first major- party nominee since 1980, to refuse to release any of his federal income tax returns. This break in tradition has led lawmakers in at least twenty- five states to propose legislation requiring presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns in order to appear on state ballots. California is one of those states. On July 30, 2017, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 27 into law, effectively barring presidential candidates who have not made available for public inspection the last five years of their income tax returns from appearing …
Democracy, Deference, And Compromise: Understanding And Reforming Campaign Finance Jurisprudence, Scott P. Bloomberg
Democracy, Deference, And Compromise: Understanding And Reforming Campaign Finance Jurisprudence, Scott P. Bloomberg
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
In Citizens United, the Supreme Court interpreted the government’s interest in preventing corruption as being limited to preventing quid pro quo— cash-for-votes—corruption. This narrow interpretation drastically circumscribed legislatures’ abilities to regulate the financing of elections, in turn prompting scholars to propose a number of reforms for broadening the government interest in campaign finance cases. These reforms include urging the Court to recognize a new government interest such as political equality, to adopt a broader understanding of corruption, and to be more deferential to legislatures in defining corruption.
Building upon that body of scholarship, this Article begins with a descriptive …
Making Constitutional Sense: A Modal Approach To California's Proposition 66, Alan Romero
Making Constitutional Sense: A Modal Approach To California's Proposition 66, Alan Romero
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
For years, the California Supreme Court has adopted a deferential posture when reviewing state constitutional challenges to a ballot initiative. The decision in Briggs v. Brown underscored the degree to which courts are willing to avoid striking down ballot initiatives on constitutional grounds, such as by broadly construing the initiative’s language to avoid constitutional problems. In construing the language of Proposition 66 to avoid separation of powers problems, however, Briggs effectively re-interpreted central pillars of Proposition 66 in ways rendering it unrecognizable to Californians who cast votes for and against the initiative. Such recasting of ballot initiatives raises fundamental jurisprudential …