The Supreme Court last month declined to hear Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the ballot in New York. Now he wants the judges to catch him out the vote in Wisconsin, and he said he will call on them to abandon the vote in Michigan as well.
Both swing state courts rejected Kennedy’s appeals, with justices taking stock of the inconsistent approach of the former independent presidential candidate, who suspended his campaign in August and announced his support for Donald Trump’s bid.
In the unanimous Wisconsin state court ruling that Kennedy is appealing, the court noted that he had “simultaneously claimed damages in some states for not being removed from the ballot, and damages in other states for not being on the ballot posted.”
Nevertheless, Kennedy argues in an emergency filing with the U.S. Supreme Court this week that his constitutional rights are being violated by arresting him. Noting that Wisconsin law gives major party candidates more leeway in entering and exiting, his lawyers argue to the justices that forcing Kennedy to remain in office forces his speech to violate the First Amendment and that the differential treatment by the status of independent candidates is contrary to equal treatment of independent candidates. protection.
“It is Robert F. Kennedy’s absolute right to support Donald Trump for president,” his lawyers wrote in the filing, arguing that keeping him on the ballot violates his rights.
Voting is already underway in Wisconsin. Kennedy wants a sticker placed in his name, citing state law that allows such action if a candidate dies.
In his Supreme Court petition, Kennedy’s lawyers also say he will appeal his Michigan denial to them as well. In the Michigan case, the federal appeals court covering that state declined to hear his claim.
Judge Eric Clay of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the denial, writing that removing Kennedy at this stage would “disrupt the orderly conduct of the presidential election in Michigan.” The judge appointed by Bill Clinton called Kennedy’s claim “completely fraudulent” and noted that “at the same time that plaintiff [Kennedy] claims he wants to forgo the presidential election in Michigan because he is no longer running for president. He is suing to have his name placed on the ballot as a presidential candidate in New York State based on his claim that he still wants to campaign for the Office of the President.”
But in his petition to the Wisconsin Supreme Court teasing an upcoming Michigan appeal to the justices, Kennedy cited a dissent from Trump-appointed 6th Circuit Judge Amul Thapar, who called Kennedy’s claim one of “exceptional importance”: coercing a person to vote coercing his speech in violation of the First Amendment?” Thapar called the consequences of that question “enormous.” He wondered: “If a candidate cannot get their name on the ballot, can contesting states put President Joe Biden back on their ballot? Can states put anyone they want on their ballot (in violation of their own election laws)?”
We should learn soon enough whether the Supreme Court is interested in taking up these questions or others that could wreak havoc in the battleground states that could effectively decide this election.
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal newsletter for expert analysis of the week’s top legal stories, including Supreme Court updates and developments in Donald Trump’s lawsuits.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
