Eames v. Cutno
Eames v. Cutno
Opinion of the Court
In re Betty Parker; Josephine Strong; Leila Eames; Med Cullins; — Plaintiffis); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E, Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 650302; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2016 CE 1054.
| tDeriied.
Concurring Opinion
additionally concurs and assigns reasons,
hi concur in the denial of the writ application for the reasons expressed by Judges CRAIN and THERIOT in their concurrences to the court of appeal opinion.
Dissenting Opinion
concurs and • assigns reasons.
hi concur in the denial of the writ application for the following reasons. Qualifications for the office of United States Representative are contained in U.S. Const owe any outstanding fines. Art. 1, Section 2. These qualifications are exclusive, and neither a state constitution nor state law can add to nor take away from such qualifications. U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779, 805, 115 S.Ct. 1842, 1856, 131 L.Ed.2d 881 (1995). Because Mr. Cutno is seeking the office of United States Representative, he is not subject to the Campaign Finance Disclosure Act pursuant to La. R.S. 18:463(A)(2)(a)(v), and therefore not required to certify that he does not, fees, or penalties under state campaign finance law.
KNOLL, J., additionally concurs for the reasons assigned by. Justice CLARK.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Leila EAMES, Med Cullins, Betty Parker and Josephine Strong v. Kenneth CUTNO and Tom Schedler in his Official Capacity as Secretary of State for the State of Louisiana
- Status
- Published