Another ballot issue that will rear its head, if it becomes necessary if Paul does not win the Republican (and if he chooses to continue running), is the fight against "sore loser laws", laws passed in states to prevent primary losers running in the general election.
On the books, almost every state has a law against "sore loser" candidates. Fortunately, 46 of them exempt the presidential race from the law. The only four states that do not specifically exempt presidential candidates are South Dakota, Mississippi, Ohio and Texas. Of those, South Dakota and Mississippi have no precedent, Ohio has amended its laws so that "sore loser" presidential candidates cannot run and Texas courts have ruled the same.
However, a while back Richard Winger at Ballot Access News suggested a way that Paul could still get on all 51 ballots if he decided to run 3rd Party or Independent:
However, the opinion does not discuss the fact that the true candidates in November are running for presidential elector, not president. A presidential candidate’s name is not listed on the November ballot in his or her role as a candidate. Instead, the name is an identifier for specific slates of candidates for presidential elector.Since Congress has repeatedly recognized that presidential electors may vote for anyone who holds the constitutional qualifications to be president (by always counting the votes for so-called “faithless electors”, except in 1872 when some electors voted for Horace Greeley even though he was deceased), it seems plain that no state can tell a slate of presidential electors that they cannot label themselves with the name of anyone they intend to vote for. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court said in Anderson v Celebrezze that a single state has a lesser state interest in blocking a presidential candidate from its ballot than from blocking candidates for other office. Since the overwhelming majority of states permit “sore loser” presidential candidates, it is likely that a court in the future would not uphold Texas’ interpretation.
And, if it did, the Texas Libertarian electors could always say that they are pledged to Ron Paul, Jr., the Congressman’s son. Then, if they were actually elected, they could vote for Ron Paul, Sr., notwithstanding their ruse.
