If a candidate is eligible according to the law of the land, he or she is eligible. We don’t go around inventing new rules to address specific cases. That’s bad law.
I once served on a nominating committee of an organization small enough so that the pool of potential officers was very limited. When I accepted the appointment, I asked the appointing officer, “What if my husband wants to run?” and he said “That’s fine—no problem.” In fact he did want to run, and so I abstained from any committee discussion and voting whatsoever that affected him. The committee chair happened to be in the same situation—spouse wanting to run for office—and did the same. I’ll testify that it was scrupulously honest and above board.
However, another candidate in the same election—unopposed, as it happened—took exception to that occurrence and got a ruling passed that no nominating committee could nominate the spouse of a committee member.
Ok, fair enough if that’s how they feel. And it’s not as if we hadn’t asked.
That same officer subsequently chaired a nominating committee and put her son-in-law up as a candidate. And of course other relationships were represented as well: live-in partner, father-daughter, etc. How close is too close?
How about father-son?
Perhaps we should make a law first that says no son of a former president can become president.
And then where do you stop? Sibling? grandchild? niece or nephew? how about secret lover?
As soon as we stop looking at the candidate’s qualifications and start looking at personal relationships we are in for a world of trouble.
Dammit, @Was,—uh @CWOTUS, you beat me again.