If part of what it means to be a law is the possibility of enforcement, then it seems like those bits of state constitutions which Ender cited are law no longer, even though they may remain "on the books." As a symbol of religious descrimination, yes they should be removed. But I don't think they pose any threat to someone's running for public office. In fact, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 1961
that such clauses are unenforceable. To take such a clause as if it were "law", a binding rule, is stretching the truth of the matter by a wide margin.