Law Professor Derek T. Muller has published a scholarly paper about presidential tax returns and various laws and proposals to force presidential candidates to reveal them. Here is a link to the summary. The summary page has a link to the paper itself.
The paper has the complete history of which presidential candidates have released their returns in the past, and when in the cycle they have done so. The paper reveals that “tax return” is a surprisingly imprecise term.
A lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Montana, challenging the state’s ban on out-of-state circulators, and the state’s ban on paying circulators on a per-signature basis (for initiatives) was filed on May 9, 2018. After extensive discovery lasting many months, the case is finally moving to a decision. The briefs for summary judgment on each side are due October 4, 2019. The case is before U.S. District Judge Charles Lovell, a Reagan appointee.
Jacobin has this article by two Bernie Sanders supporters, Bhaskar Sunkara and Micah Uetricht, attacking the Working Families Party’s process for endorsing a presidential candidate. A few days ago the Working Families Party endorsed Elizabeth Warren. The article claims the process was opaque and unfair.
Earlier this month, the American Solidarity Party chose Brian T. Carroll for president, in an on-line convention. He lives in Visalia, California. In 2018 he ran for U.S. House in the 22nd district, and polled 1,591 votes in the six-person primary, or 1.3%. His ballot label was “party preference: none” but if he had been permitted to have his actual party name on the ballot, it would have been “American Solidarity.”
The American Solidarity Party web page is here. It ran its first presidential campaign in 2016. Its presidential nominee in 2016 was Michael Maturen, who was only on the ballot in Colorado, but Maturen filed for write-in status in many states, and even though he only received 862 votes in Colorado, when his write-ins from other states are included, he received 6,765 votes in the nation, placing 14th. Thanks to Charles Sherrouse for this news.
On September 16, the California Republican Party and its chair filed this very brief response to the amicus curiae of Law Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, in Patterson v Padilla. That is the case on whether the state constitution bars the legislature from requiring presidential primary candidates to reveal their income tax returns.
The Republican response says that the arguments in the amicus are no different than the state government’s arguments. It further says that the amicus was filed after the deadline.
