The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday against former separate 2024 presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s try to include his name taken off the ballot in Michigan and Wisconsin, two states expected to have a significant impact on the selection of the next president.
Following Tuesday’s decision, Kennedy, who recently suspended his campaign and endorsed former President Donald Trump, released a statement on X, saying,” The Supreme Court has sadly now sided with the Secretary of State of Michigan and Wisconsin, both Liberals, to destroy election integrity and keep my name on the ballot in both those claims. In the guise of pure political expediency, Trump supporters are voting for me instead of someone else in the hope that those who would have then cast their ballots may cast theirs away.
Kennedy urged citizens to not let the Supreme Court’s decision “undermine” the 2024 vote and to” not been fooled”.
” I’m off the vote in every other condition aside from Michigan and Wisconsin,” Kennedy wrote. ” But, if you are in Michigan or Wisconsin, please make sure to vote for Donald Trump — DO NOT VOTE FOR ME. Together we will Make America Healthy Again”!
READ MORE: 2024 president’s name removed from bounce state vote
In a petition to the Supreme Court, Kennedy’s legitimate group claimed that Jocelyn Benson, the state’s secretary of state, and the Wisconsin Election Commission’s determination to forbid his name from appearing on the ballot were violating his First Amendment rights. The Wisconsin Election Commission and Benson, on the other hand, claimed in The Daily Wire that the name of the original independent candidate had been removed from the ballot before the election.
” By recertifying the vote to include Kennedy’s brand as a political candidate, the Secretary has compelled his speech in violation of the First Amendment”, Kennedy’s solicitors wrote in an argument against Benson. ” A review of the above information clearly demonstrates that Secretary Benson has compelled Mr. Kennedy’s statement and, consequently, violated his Democratic right”.
Justices Amul Thapar and Chad Readler wrote in a dissented view from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals before Kennedy’s appeal to the Supreme Court that” this case raises a question of extraordinary value: Does compulsion of talk in violation of the First Amendment apply to people? That question has a lot of implications. Could battleground states re-elect President Joe Biden if a candidate ca n’t stop his name from appearing on their ballots?
Justice Neil Gorsuch of the Supreme Court indicated in a dissented view on Tuesday that he concurred with the two Appeals Court judges.
