How have the courts interpreted section 6403 of the Federal Elections Act?

In my opinion, just as the court in Green v. Jordan, supra, 216 Cal. 318, 14 P.2d 297, in the exercise of its discretion declined to enter upon a profound constitutional inquiry against an election official's statutory deadline, we also should have exercised the discretion inherent in section 6403, and promptly dismissed the pending proceedings.

I now direct my discussion to the farreaching decision of my esteemed colleagues, and to what I believe is their erroneous interpretation of Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 92 S.Ct. 849, 31 L.Ed.2d 92.

Lifting an incidental and unrelated dictum of the Bullock v. Carter decision from a footnote (405 U.S. at p. 148, fn. 29, 92 S.Ct. 858), the majority here say, 'The term 'filing' fee has long been thought to cover the cost of filing, that is, the cost of placing a particular document on the public record.' (I have added the emphasis.) They then say 'thay when Bullock speaks

Page 454