The dominant argument against the passage of legislation banning political dynasties is that no person

should be deprived of his right to run for public office solely on the basis of his family name. The
argument contains two (2) angles: (i) the scope of Congress authority to impose restrictions on the right
to run and (ii) an equal protection angle, both of which we will discuss in this article.
Driving our hook directly into the flanks of these dual objections, it should be said right away that there is
no Constitutional provision which specifically grants an individual any right to run for public
office. Nevertheless, the view has been expressed that the right touches on both the freedom of
expression and freedom of association clauses of the Constitution. This reasoning is based on Mancuso
vs. Taft [476 F2d 187 (1972)] where it was ruled that any legislative classification that significantly
burdens [the candidacy] interest must be subjected to strict equal protection review.