A North Carolina judge has rejected Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s request to remove his name from the state's presidential ballots for the upcoming November election.
According to AP News, Wake County Superior Court Judge Rebecca Holt denied the temporary restraining order sought by Kennedy. The decision came just a day before the first batch of absentee ballots was scheduled to be mailed out to registered voters who had requested them.
Kennedy initially secured a spot on the ballot as the nominee of the newly formed We The People party, suspended his campaign two weeks ago and endorsed Republican nominee Donald Trump. Since then, he has been attempting to have his name removed from ballots in several battleground states, including North Carolina, where the race between Trump and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris is expected to be closely contested.
The decision to keep Kennedy's name on the North Carolina ballots came after a party-line vote by the state's elections board on August 29. The board's Democratic members rejected the We The People party's request to withdraw Kennedy's name, citing the impracticality of making changes so close to the ballot distribution date of September 6.
In response to this decision, Kennedy filed a lawsuit the following day, arguing that his free-speech rights under the state constitution were being violated by forcing him to remain on the ballot against his will. His attorney, Phil Strach, contended that Kennedy had complied with state law by submitting a written request to step down as a candidate.
The state, represented by Special Deputy Attorney General Mary Carla Babb, argued that removing Kennedy's name at this stage would cause confusion and potentially force North Carolina to seek a waiver for the federal deadline of September 21 for releasing ballots to military and overseas voters.
Judge Holt's ruling emphasized the potential harm to the state board if an order to remove Kennedy's name was issued. She noted that the reprinting of ballots would come at a considerable cost to taxpayers, while the harm to Kennedy for remaining on the ballot was deemed minimal.
Kennedy's attorney announced plans to appeal the decision, with Judge Holt granting a 24-hour window and instructing election officials not to send out ballots before noon on Friday. This development adds another layer of complexity to an already contentious election process.
The case in North Carolina is not isolated, as Kennedy has been involved in similar legal battles in other states. In New York, a state judge dismissed a lawsuit backed by the Democratic National Committee that sought to keep Kennedy off the ballot. However, another New York judge had previously barred Kennedy from appearing on the state ballot due to residency issues.
Kennedy's efforts to manage his ballot presence extend beyond North Carolina and New York. He has recently filed a lawsuit in Wisconsin to have his name removed from the presidential ballot there, following the state elections commission's vote to keep him on it.
In Michigan, Kennedy faced a similar situation where a judge ruled that he must remain on the ballot despite his efforts to withdraw. These legal challenges across multiple states highlight the complexities of ballot access and the impact of candidate decisions on electoral processes.
As the first state scheduled to distribute fall election ballots, North Carolina's decision carries significant weight. County elections offices were expected to send absentee ballots to over 125,000 in-state military and overseas voters who had requested them, with more than 2.9 million absentee and in-person ballots already printed statewide as of Wednesday.
The rejection of Kennedy's request to remove his name from North Carolina ballots underscores the intricate balance between candidate rights, electoral logistics, and voter clarity. This decision may influence how voters perceive the election landscape and could potentially impact the outcome in this crucial battleground state. The ongoing legal battles in multiple states reflect the challenges of navigating the complex web of election laws and regulations, especially when candidates change their status close to election day.
