Former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s name will appear on the November ballot in Michigan, a critical swing state that could help deliver the presidency. The state’s supreme court ruled that Mr. Kennedy’s request to have his name withdrawn was not based in law or necessity.
Mr. Kennedy withdrew from the race after anemic polling and fundraising numbers and endorsed President Trump, saying the former president was more prepared to take on the entrenched interests of Washington. He then moved to take his name off the ballot in critical swing states where the election between Trump and Vice President Harris is expected to be decided by just a handful of votes.
He would, however, keep his name on the ballot in safe red and blue states like West Virginia and Vermont so that at least Americans in those states could register their frustrations with the two-party system.
Mr. Kennedy “has neither pointed to any source of law that prescribes and defines a duty to withdraw a candidate’s name from the ballot nor demonstrated his clear legal right to performance of this specific duty,” the Michigan supreme court said in its opinion, which was released Monday. The justices wrote that he had not shown “an entitlement to this extraordinary relief.”
Mr. Kennedy asked the court on the night of August 30 — the start of the Labor Day holiday weekend — to strip his name from the ballot. He was nominated by the state’s Natural Law Party, which in turn wrote to the secretary of state’s office saying they opposed Mr. Kennedy’s effort to remove himself from the ballot because the minor party would “face severe prejudice if its candidate were removed from the ballot.”
The decision was 5–2, with the Republican-appointed chief justice siding with the four Democratic appointees in denying Mr. Kennedy’s petition to remove his name.
The two other Republican appointees, Justice Brian Zahra and Justice David Viviano, said that the court had no justification for forcing Mr. Kennedy to remain on the ballot given that the ballots have yet to be printed. They say the court’s decision will undermine Michiganders’ faith in the voting system.
“There is no practical reason for denying a request to withdraw before the ballots have been printed for the general election,” the two dissenting justices write. “There is, however, a significant cost to the integrity of the election: the voters will be improperly denied a choice between persons who are actually candidates, and who are willing to serve if elected.”
“There is great distrust in the American voting system. The ballots printed as a result of the Court’s decision will have the potential to confuse the voters, distort their choices, and pervert the true popular will and affect the outcome of the election,” the dissenters said.
Some commentators online were quick to point out that it may be unfair that Mr. Kennedy was forced to remain on the Michigan ballot while President Biden, who also withdrew from the race, was permitted to withdraw his name. The issue was that Mr. Biden had never been formally nominated by the Democrats, while Mr. Kennedy had already been nominated by the state’s Natural Law Party as their presidential candidate.
Impact on Trump’s Victory Chances
The decision to keep Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the ballot in Michigan poses a potential threat to President Trump’s victory chances in the upcoming election. With the state being a critical swing state that could play a decisive role in determining the outcome of the presidential race, the presence of Mr. Kennedy on the ballot could potentially split the vote and impact the final results.
President Trump’s campaign has been closely monitoring the situation in Michigan and is concerned about the implications of Mr. Kennedy’s continued presence on the ballot. The decision by the state’s supreme court to deny Mr. Kennedy’s request to withdraw his name has raised questions about the fairness and integrity of the electoral process in the state.
The Trump campaign is now faced with the challenge of strategizing how to mitigate the potential impact of Mr. Kennedy’s candidacy on their chances of winning Michigan. With the election expected to be closely contested, every vote will count, and the presence of a third-party candidate like Mr. Kennedy could complicate the electoral math for President Trump.
Legal and Ethical Considerations
The Michigan supreme court’s ruling to keep Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the ballot has sparked debates about the legal and ethical considerations surrounding the decision. While the court cited the lack of a legal basis for Mr. Kennedy’s request to withdraw his name, critics argue that the decision goes against the principles of fairness and transparency in the electoral process.
Some legal experts have questioned the court’s interpretation of the law and whether it was the right decision to force Mr. Kennedy to remain on the ballot against his wishes. The dissenting justices raised concerns about the potential impact on voters’ choices and the integrity of the election, highlighting the need for a more nuanced approach to such cases.
Ethically, the decision to keep Mr. Kennedy on the ballot raises questions about the rights of candidates to make decisions about their own campaigns and the potential disenfranchisement of voters who may be confused by the presence of a candidate who has withdrawn from the race. The court’s ruling has implications not just for the current election but for future electoral processes in Michigan and beyond.
Public Reaction and Political Fallout
The decision to keep Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the ballot in Michigan has elicited strong reactions from the public and has the potential to have significant political fallout in the state and beyond. Supporters of Mr. Kennedy have expressed disappointment at the ruling, while critics have raised concerns about the impact on the electoral process and the potential implications for the outcome of the election.
Politically, the decision could have far-reaching consequences for both major parties in Michigan and could influence the dynamics of the presidential race in the state. The Trump campaign will need to reassess its strategy in light of Mr. Kennedy’s continued candidacy, while the Biden-Harris campaign could also be affected by the presence of a third-party candidate on the ballot.
Overall, the decision to keep Mr. Kennedy on the ballot in Michigan has added a new dimension to an already contentious and closely watched election. The implications of the ruling will be closely monitored in the coming weeks as the presidential race heats up and the stakes continue to rise.