This has come up in the news lately: States passing rules that a Presidential candidate must disclose several years of tax returns in order to be placed on the ballot. That leads me to the question: Do States have that right? Like many I went Googling in an attempt to find an answer. Found a number of opinions but no clear cut answer. The closest I came to was Requirements to hold office. There have been a number of challenges over time that ended up in SCOTUS. In those cases it appears that ruling kept tightly to the Constitutional guidelines. Nothing I could find specific about Tax Documentation. Like most topics in the political arena, the unbiased answers are hard to come by. It does appear that there are some rather strict privacy laws attached to this. A couple of items that I ran across as I read on this topic: *snip* If the states wanted to instruct their Electoral College delegates, that’s a very different constitutional question than for Congress to require it, but is still constitutionally dubious. Powell v. McCormick and U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton make it clear that neither Congress nor the states can add to qualifications for members of Congress. This same rationale should apply to presidents. *snip* Other legal experts are also confident in the soundness of the tax-return maneuver. Laurence Tribe, a Harvard University law professor and frequent critic of the Trump administration, described Maryland’s bill as a “neutral, even-handed way” to allow voters to assess the “financial and ethical history” of would-be candidates. He also viewed its constitutional footing as more secure. “It’s not an interference with any federal prerogative, nor does it filter out in advance any set of presidential candidates who meet the Constitution’s age, residence, and other qualifications,” Tribe said. *snip* Not everyone is convinced that efforts to require the disclosure of tax returns are constitutional. Critics note that the U.S. Constitution already sets out qualifications to become president. They say it’s not up to states to add new ones. Specifically, Article Two of the Constitution establishes three requirements to win the White House: The president must be a “natural born citizen,” must be at least 35 years old, and must be a resident within the United States for 14 years. The U.S. Supreme Court has also ruled that states and the federal government cannot add to the qualifications of senators and congressional representatives beyond those outlined in the Constitution — something that could be extended to the president. *snip* As Stevens found in a later case on the same topic, states may be charged with administering federal elections, but they may not use that power to impose policy choices that the Constitution does not contain. Even beyond the historical precedent, the reason for this is obvious. If each state determines on its own who may be elected to federal office, the Congress would no longer be a truly federal legislature. It would revert instead to the confederal legislature created by the Articles of Confederation. https://newrepublic.com/article/147310/can-states-ban-trump-ballot-doesnt-release-tax-returns https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ntial-candidates-to-release-their-tax-returns https://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/candidates-tax-returns/ https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/14/opin...sclosure-legal-tribe-painter-eisen/index.html https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/states-compel-presidential-candidates-release-tax-returns https://thefederalist.com/2017/03/1...-presidential-candidates-release-tax-returns/ Comments, opinions,and factual knowledge is welcome.