>>bhm: So to answer your question, I can't think of anything that should give you the power to prevent me from voting for anyone, let alone a highly popular candidate. Elections are exactly the way to settle such disagreements.<<

If a candidate is running (popularity is irrelevant) and some state discovers that his birth certificate is fake and he's really only 35 years old, not 38. Is that enough to
disqualify him? - g01

If the candidate is 35 years old, then his age does not disqualify hie.

I think you likely meant 34 in your example in which case the state of Colorado should sue the candidate in Federal court to obtain relief and not attempt to make a unilateral decision no matter how obvious the disqualification appears to be. I think this is the essence of the still to be formally issued decision by SCOTUS.


If Trump were to have actively participated in "storming the Capitol" and had been spraying tear gas and bashing police with a flag pole, would that be enough to disqualify him? How about if he had been convicted and jailed in 2023 for doing just that?

Same as above, if a decision regarding qualifications is needed, this is an issue within the jurisdiction of federal courts and not state courts.

Being a highly regarded constitutional law expert, my opinion is,

Being a convicted felon is not among the criteria listed in the constitution, so I suppose he could be on the ballot as long as all the other ballot access criteria are met, which is doubtful if the potential candidate is a known odious felon. Even less likely, the odious candidate could actually win, but if he did, then the voters decision is final, unless the conviction was for the felony of insurrection, then in order to be sworn in, congress would have to vote by 2/3 majority in each house to waive the disqualifying event.

This being an unexplored area of constitutional law, it is hard to predict how such a scenario would spiral out of control from there. Constitutional crisis would be an understatement.