The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Sept. 27 ruled that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s name will remain on the state’s presidential ballot in November even though he has suspended his independent campaign.
The court also found that Kennedy’s appellate briefs were inadequate for reviewing his claims and reversing a lower court’s exercise of discretion in denying his request for a temporary injunction—which would have removed his name from the Wisconsin ballot.
“The challenger must demonstrate that the circuit court did not examine the relevant facts, apply a proper standard of law, or reach a conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach by applying a demonstrated rational process. We conclude that he has failed to satisfy this burden,” the ruling states.
The lower court had concluded that Kennedy did not suffer any irreparable harm since he had voluntarily submitted his nomination papers and declaration of candidacy, according to the state supreme court’s order.
The lower court also said that removing Kennedy’s name from the ballot could inflict harm on the public, citing the high cost of reprinting ballots and logistical problems in conducting an election with ballots on which stickers were placed to obscure his name, according to the ruling.
“We emphasize that we are not making any legal determinations on our own regarding the claims made by Kennedy and we are not agreeing with the circuit court’s legal conclusions on those claims. We simply are unable to make such determinations, given the inadequate briefing presented to us,” the supreme court stated.
“Consequently, because there is no basis in this appeal on which we could determine that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion, we must affirm the circuit court’s order denying Kennedy’s motion for a temporary injunction.”
Kennedy’s attorney, Joseph Bugni, told The Epoch Times by email that they plan to seek reconsideration before the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
However, Bradley said that the timelines under which the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) and the supreme court operate “hamstring candidates in Kennedy’s situation.”
“Kennedy could have filed an original action petition with this court rather than proceeding in circuit court, but this court’s decisions to grant or deny original action petitions lack predictable standards, leaving parties to guess the right avenue for challenging WEC’s decisions,” the justice stated.
Bradley also raised concerns over the “immense” ramifications of the case, saying that keeping a non-candidate such as Kennedy on the ballot could lead to confusion among voters.
“Voters may cast their ballots in favor of a candidate who withdrew his candidacy, thereby losing their right to cast a meaningful vote. Ballots listing a non-candidate mislead voters and may skew a presidential election,” the justice wrote.
Kennedy withdrew from the presidential race at the end of August, endorsing former President Donald Trump and seeking to have his name removed from the ballot in key battleground states so as not to split the conservative vote.
