Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has announced his intention to appeal a New York court ruling that bars him from appearing on the state’s ballot.
The decision, handed down on Monday, claims Kennedy made false statements about his residency. On Tuesday, Kennedy told Scripps News that the ruling was politically motivated and violated the 12th Amendment.
Kennedy’s legal team argues that the ruling was based on a misunderstanding of federal election laws, which require candidates to declare a domicile in one state for ballot purposes. Kennedy, who has listed a mailing address in California on federal statements, asserts that his legal domicile is New York because it is the state where he votes.
The ruling, if upheld, could remove Kennedy from the New York ballot and potentially set a precedent for other states to do the same. Kennedy, however, is confident in his legal standing, stating that his domicile in New York is beyond question. “The federal statement was a mailing address in California,” Kennedy said in an interview. “The domicile legally has to be the place you vote.”
Kennedy’s legal troubles began when a judge found that he had falsely attested to living in New York, a requirement for appearing on the state’s ballot as an independent candidate. In response, Kennedy took an oath in New Hampshire, asserting that he had voted in New York and that it is, therefore, his legal domicile.
Kennedy insists that the court's decision is part of a broader effort by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to keep him off the ballot. He views the ruling as a violation of the 12th Amendment, which outlines the requirements for presidential candidates and prohibits states from adding their own.
Kennedy’s primary argument against the ruling is that it added an unconstitutional burden to the requirements for running for president.
According to the 12th Amendment, a candidate must be a natural-born citizen, at least 35 years old, and have been a resident of the United States for 14 years. Kennedy argues that New York’s residency requirement is an additional hurdle that the Constitution does not permit.
“States are not allowed to add a burden to the three requirements the 12th Amendment imposes for running for president,” Kennedy told Scripps News. He warned that allowing such state-specific rules could create a “patchwork” of regulations that would make it difficult for national candidates to run in certain states.
The DNC, however, disputes Kennedy’s interpretation of the law. A spokesperson for the committee accused Kennedy of running a “spoiler candidacy” and described him as “a fraud through and through.” The DNC’s stance suggests that they see Kennedy’s campaign as a threat to the party’s chances in the upcoming election.
Kennedy’s appeal is expected to challenge the New York ruling on constitutional grounds, focusing on the 12th Amendment’s limitations on state powers. He is optimistic about his chances on appeal, arguing that the facts support his claim that New York is his legal domicile.
“The DNC is stretching for any reason to keep me off the ballot, and they will lose this case on appeal because my domicile is New York,” Kennedy stated. He remains adamant that his candidacy is legitimate and that the ruling will be overturned.
In the meantime, Kennedy continues to campaign as an independent candidate, despite the legal challenges he faces. His supporters view the New York ruling as a politically motivated attempt to undermine his campaign, while his opponents see it as a necessary enforcement of election laws.
