RFK Jr. election decisions/ Kennedy ballot removals/ RFK Jr. court rulings/ Newslooks/ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. won a legal battle to stay on the Michigan ballot but was removed from North Carolina’s. He had suspended his campaign, endorsing Donald Trump. Each state’s highest courts delivered opposite rulings on the issue.
RFK Jr. Ballot Ruling: Quick Looks
- North Carolina: Supreme Court rules 4-3 to remove Kennedy from ballots.
- Michigan: Supreme Court reverses lower court decision, keeping Kennedy on.
- Kennedy Campaign: RFK Jr. withdrew and endorsed Trump over two weeks ago.
- Absentee Ballots: North Carolina will reprint ballots, potentially delaying distribution.
- Legal Impact: Conflicting rulings highlight varied legal interpretations in battleground states.
Michigan Keeps RFK Jr. on Ballot, but removed from North Carolina
Deep Look
On Monday, September 9, 2024, the highest courts in Michigan and North Carolina issued contrasting rulings concerning the presence of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on their respective presidential ballots. These decisions are particularly significant as Kennedy suspended his campaign over two weeks ago and endorsed Republican nominee Donald Trump, aiming to withdraw his name from several battleground states where the competition between Trump and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris is expected to be close.
In Michigan, Kennedy filed a lawsuit on August 30 against Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, attempting to remove his name from the ballot. Kennedy feared his continued presence would siphon votes from Trump, who had previously secured a narrow victory in Michigan in 2016 by roughly 10,000 votes. The state’s Supreme Court ultimately reversed a lower court ruling on Monday, stating in a brief order that Kennedy had not demonstrated any legal grounds for “extraordinary relief.” This decision ensures that his name will remain on Michigan’s ballots despite his withdrawal from the race.
In North Carolina, the Supreme Court issued a ruling of a different nature. A 4-3 decision ordered that Kennedy’s name be removed from the ballot. This ruling followed a request by North Carolina’s State Board of Elections, which had argued that keeping Kennedy on the ballot was impractical due to the progress made in distributing ballots, including the printing and coding of tabulation machines. The state’s Democratic-led elections board had originally rejected the attempt by the newly formed We The People party, which had organized Kennedy’s candidacy, to withdraw him from the ballot.
However, a Court of Appeals overturned this initial decision on Friday, ordering Kennedy’s removal. This was subsequently upheld by the North Carolina Supreme Court on Monday. The decision carries logistical and financial consequences, as it mandates that election officials reprint ballots and reassemble absentee ballot packages—an expense that must be borne by the counties. Over 136,000 absentee ballot requests had already been submitted by late last week, and more than 2.9 million ballots including Kennedy’s name had been printed, according to the state elections board.
The reprinting process could take up to two weeks, potentially delaying the distribution of ballots to military and overseas voters, which is required by federal law to occur by September 21. State attorneys acknowledged the logistical challenge posed by the ruling but emphasized the importance of ensuring voters’ rights to cast ballots for active candidates. The court’s ruling also noted that expediting the ballot reprinting process, though costly and time-consuming, was necessary to protect the “fundamental right” of North Carolina voters to have their votes count.
The dissenting justices, including Democrats Allison Riggs and Anita Earls, along with Republican Justice Richard Dietz, criticized the decision. Justice Riggs expressed frustration that the “whims” of Kennedy had been prioritized over the constitutional rights of voters eager to vote.
Meanwhile, Michigan’s legal landscape presents a stark contrast. The Michigan Supreme Court, where Democratic nominees hold a 4-3 majority, denied Kennedy’s request for removal. Two Republican-nominated justices issued dissenting opinions, lamenting the possible national implications of the decision. The case centered around Michigan law, which prohibits candidates from withdrawing after accepting a minor party’s nomination. Kennedy had been nominated by the Natural Law Party in Michigan.
Angela Benander, a spokesperson for Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, expressed relief at the court’s swift ruling, noting that election clerks could now proceed with printing ballots to meet upcoming federal deadlines. In contrast, Kennedy’s attorney, Aaron Siri, lauded the North Carolina decision for ensuring voters wouldn’t mistakenly cast votes for a withdrawn candidate but criticized the Michigan ruling.
These conflicting rulings underscore the complexity of election law, particularly in battleground states, where even a withdrawn candidate’s presence on the ballot could sway the outcome of a highly competitive race.
