Like with anything, they can't just do it for any reason. There's a wealth of federal and state election law to adhere to (which means actual "probable cause" for ballot rejections can differ from state to state), but the bottom line is that, yes, states and in many cases even individual counties can remove candidates' names from the ballot if there are legitimate problems or Constitutional challenges.
For instance, Santorum did not appear on several election districts' ballots in northern Ohio and the Columbus area because he a) did not file paperwork on time and b) in at least one instance did not get necessary signatories.
2bfree is correct, however, that most of these alleged offenses are hammered out or overridden in court prior to elections.
In this case, Arizona detractors would have to show a preponderance of evidence that has never been previously shown or withstood even the most superficial examination.
I mean, seriously, what the hell is wrong with Arizona?
Lots of things. I mean, they lost the Super Bowl back in '93 because they refused to honor Martin Luther King Jr. Day.
Arizona is right up there on my shit list for places I don't want to go to unless I absolutely have to for work. Yeah, it means no Grand Canyon for me, but there are other places I'd still like to see.
I don't agree with the rhetoric, but I'm also against some of the notions of the law being pushed forward. That said... I think there's a problem, and we should certainly try to pass legislation to close the abuse of that loophole... and I'm not sure what the fuck to do about it, because that shit gets complicated quick...
It kind of reminds me of how listings for states/countries that search for the most porn in general tend to be the most conservative/uptight/etc. For example, Utah leads the US in porn searching and Pakistan leads the world (both adjusted for population size, I assume).
Comments
Also, dat face
For instance, Santorum did not appear on several election districts' ballots in northern Ohio and the Columbus area because he a) did not file paperwork on time and b) in at least one instance did not get necessary signatories.
2bfree is correct, however, that most of these alleged offenses are hammered out or overridden in court prior to elections.
In this case, Arizona detractors would have to show a preponderance of evidence that has never been previously shown or withstood even the most superficial examination.
tl;dr: HEEEEEEEEEERP DEEEEEEEEEEEEERP /eyeroll
I mean, seriously, what the hell is wrong with Arizona?
Arizona is right up there on my shit list for places I don't want to go to unless I absolutely have to for work. Yeah, it means no Grand Canyon for me, but there are other places I'd still like to see.
"Hi, could I get an open ticket to someplace in Europe. I dunno, say... Finland? Why? *glances at buzzfeed.com* Oh, no reason."
1. Mississippi
2. Texas
3. New Mexico
4. Florida
5. West Virginia
6. Louisiana
7. Kentucky
8. New York
9. Arizona
10. Colorado
If I had a closet that nice, I wouldn't come out of it either.