The lower courts will know if an action brought against the president is a serious matter or just someone trying to have a day in the light, publicity.
Even if civil litigation is allowed to impact the president the risk of it actually interfering with his or her duties is not a serious matter of concern
Even if one obtains the presidency and argues there must be separation of powers the Supreme Court has already made it known that they are able to say if the actions taken by the president are lawful.
Even though an individual obtains the presidential office they like everyone else who serves the government and its people are not above the law.
A designated office and the person in that office are two separate things. When a president functions within his executive duty it is legal outside of that their actions can come into question.
immunity does not apply to unofficial conduct. Actions taken that have nothing to do with their official duty aren't subject to immunity.
immunity for public servants is based on making sure officials aren't scared to do their jobs. Meaning if they do something within the confines of their official duty they shouldn't have to worry.
The Framers wanted the Constitution to be an exclusive source of qualifications for electing members of Congress and they took the power away from the states to add or take away qualifications.
Petitioners argue that the constitution does not express that states cannot add qualifications and Amendment 73 is the states exercise of its reserved power to place restrictions that the voters want to make.
Amendment 73 limits people to vote for who they want to represent them by not allowing a candidate to be written in.
The people have the right to chose their representatives not the states.
Due to the interconnected nature of interstate commerce, an interruption at any stage causes problems down the line.
The Tenth Amendment does not give states the power to add qualifications because it is not within the "original powers" of the states.
Jones & Laughlin purchase raw materials for manufacturing from other states and ship goods across state lines.
Jones and Laughlin Steel are subject to interstate laws regardless of where manufacturing takes place.
The employer cannot interfere with employee rights to organize.
It does not interfere with a company's ability to hire and fire its employees.
They said that the section was applicable because term limits would regulate the ballot not the qualifications for office