According to a report by The Washington Examiner, independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s ballot access could be at risk in multiple states following a rejection in New York.
New York Supreme Court Justice Christina Ryba ruled against Kennedy, finding that he violated state law by listing a New York address as his residence on the ballot access petition despite living in California.
The ruling has raised concerns about Kennedy's ballot access in other states, with challenges already emerging in Illinois and Pennsylvania. Kennedy had previously defeated legal challenges in six other states, but the New York decision could set a precedent for future objections.
Kennedy's legal troubles began when New York Supreme Court Justice Christina Ryba ruled in favor of Clear Choice PAC, a political action committee challenging Kennedy's ballot access.
The court determined that Kennedy violated New York state law by listing a New York address as his residence despite residing in California. This decision was a result of Kennedy's attempt to avoid electoral complications arising from the fact that both he and his running mate, Nicole Shanahan, are California residents.
Prior to this ruling, Kennedy had successfully defended his ballot access in six states against similar legal challenges. However, Clear Choice PAC has signaled its intent to challenge Kennedy's residency in other key states, including Illinois and Pennsylvania.
Additionally, Maine's Secretary of State, Shenna Bellows, indicated she would consider objections to Kennedy's petition based on the New York residency issue, though a recent challenge in Maine was dropped after the objector withdrew.
Kennedy and his running mate are currently listed on the ballot in 18 states and are working to secure access in 21 additional states. Despite the setback in New York, the campaign recently announced it has collected signatures for ballot access in every remaining state and Washington, D.C., signaling their determination to be included on ballots nationwide.
The fallout from the New York ruling could have significant implications for Kennedy's presidential bid, particularly in states where ballot access is already under scrutiny. Should other states follow New York’s lead in questioning Kennedy’s residency, his ability to compete in the 2024 election could be severely compromised.
Kennedy's campaign has focused on obtaining ballot access in critical swing states such as Michigan and North Carolina, while efforts are ongoing in Georgia, Nevada, and Wisconsin. However, the status of Kennedy’s ballot access in Arizona remains unclear, further complicating his path to a successful campaign.
A significant challenge facing the Kennedy campaign involves the constitutional implications of using his California residence in the context of the 12th Amendment. Losing access to California's 55 electoral votes would be catastrophic for Kennedy’s chances, making his decision to list a New York address on his petition a strategic, albeit legally questionable, move.
Democratic allies, including Clear Choice Action, have targeted Kennedy's ballot access in numerous states, intensifying the legal battles he faces. The New York ruling adds another layer of complexity to these efforts as Kennedy's opponents continue to question the legitimacy of his campaign.
The New York Supreme Court ruling has placed Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s presidential campaign in a precarious position. With his ballot access now in question across multiple states, the campaign faces significant legal and strategic challenges in the months leading up to the election. Despite securing a spot on the ballot in 18 states, Kennedy’s ability to compete in key battleground states remains uncertain. As the campaign works to overcome these obstacles, the implications of the New York decision could have far-reaching consequences for Kennedy's bid for the White House.
