Image 01 Image 03

Supreme Court Rejects Attempt to Remove RFK Jr. From Wisconsin, Michigan Ballots

Supreme Court Rejects Attempt to Remove RFK Jr. From Wisconsin, Michigan Ballots

Kennedy wanted to remove his name from the swing states to avoid acting as a spoiler to Trump while staying on blue state ballots.

The Supreme Court rejected Robert Kennedy Jr.’s emergency appeal to have his name removed from the Michigan and Wisconsin ballots.

Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett received the cases but referred both to the full Court.

The Court did not give the vote count. Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented from the denial in the Michigan case.

Kennedy ran as an independent but dropped out in August and endorsed former President Donald Trump.

Kennedy wanted to remove his name from the swing states to avoid acting as a spoiler to Trump while staying on blue state ballots:

“Moreover, such compelled speech harms every citizen in Michigan. The Secretary, by listing Mr. Kennedy on the ballot, is misrepresenting to voters that Mr. Kennedy is qualified and willing to serve the public if elected,” Kennedy’s attorneys wrote in his Michigan application.

“Such a representation is not only incorrect, but it is also prejudicial to voters who reasonably expect that the ballot contain accurate information,” the application continued.

Michigan told the Supreme Court that over 1.5 million voters turned in their ballots, which listed Kennedy as a candidate. Over 263,000 citizens have already voted early.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments


 
 1 
 
 0
mailman | October 29, 2024 at 6:27 pm

What’s the point of this article if the justification for rejection isn’t included?? 🤔


     
     0 
     
     3
    TargaGTS in reply to mailman. | October 29, 2024 at 6:46 pm

    The Court gave no reason, which is common in these kinds of decisions (denial of application for injunction). The lone dissenter in either case was Gorsuch, only in the Kennedy case, I believe.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/102924zr1_om92.pdf

    Gorsuch cites a prior case as reason for his dissent. I’m not familiar with the case he cited and am too lazy to look it up.


     
     1 
     
     3
    Milhouse in reply to mailman. | October 29, 2024 at 6:48 pm

    The Supreme Court doesn’t usually give reasons for denying an application. And it didn’t in these two cases. The denials are linked, and they’re just bald statements that the application is denied. In the Michigan case Gorsuch added a one-sentence dissent.


 
 1 
 
 2
henrybowman | October 29, 2024 at 6:28 pm

Sad to say, but even a Court that gives us “only” 50/50 is way better than the dreck we have been used to.

“Michigan told the Supreme Court that over 1.5 million voters turned in their ballots, which listed Kennedy as a candidate. Over 263,000 citizens have already voted early.”

As if this were even still a question. While in Arizona, “Jungle primary Prop 140, which only ‘qualified’ due to 40,000 proven phony signatures, must be voted on and binding because the ballots have already been printed, but not yet distributed.”


     
     0 
     
     0
    henrybowman in reply to henrybowman. | October 30, 2024 at 1:04 am

    Oops, my error! I thought this ruling meant that RFKJ got to stay on the ballots he wanted to stay on. Instead, it meant he had to stay on the ballots he wanted to get off. So SCOTUS boffed us again.


 
 1 
 
 5
amatuerwrangler | October 29, 2024 at 7:23 pm

I believe Jr made the removal request to the states long before the early voting started. And before ballot distribution in one of the states in question.
One could say that the state authorities slow-walked the request to create the “hardship” then used that created hardship as a defense of their election tampering.


     
     0 
     
     2
    MattMusson in reply to amatuerwrangler. | October 30, 2024 at 7:22 am

    Democrats fought his being added to ballots in some states. Then fought his being removed in other states. They want him on the ballot in some but not others. Because… they already printed up their fake ballots they are planning to add to the stack.


 
 0 
 
 1
Sanddog | October 29, 2024 at 9:59 pm

It’s too late. The ballots are printed and in many cases, voting has already started.


 
 0 
 
 0
destroycommunism | October 29, 2024 at 10:08 pm

he is NOT a spoiler to anyone who would have voted trump

like I said from day one

he is not good for the trump team but if he denounces leftists>>>great

https://x.com/TheTonus/status/1851280822541959306

Tony Kinnett
@TheTonus

One week out from election, and the Harris-Walz campaign has pulled money & advertisements from TWO key swing states (WI, NC).

My God, I’ve never seen such panic.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.