U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Robert F. Kennedy, Jr’s New York Ballot Access Case

On February 24, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s New York ballot access case. Kennedy v Cartwright, 24-646. New York had kept Kennedy off the ballot because the state courts believed that the residence address on his paperwork was inaccurate. Before the election, the U.S. Supreme Court denied him injunctive relief. He kept the case alive and asked the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that it violates Article Two to require a presidential candidates to place their residence address on candidacy paperwork.

Kennedy’s cert petition has an appendix which shows that other states besides New York also require the residence address. The appendix has copies of independent presidential paperwork. See it here.


Comments

U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Robert F. Kennedy, Jr’s New York Ballot Access Case — 8 Comments

  1. Well I’m Donald Trump, the one they’re talking about, if you talk crap about me you’ll get punched in the mouth.

    If you disrespect me, forget about it, forget it. Best case for you is you’ll survive to regret it.

    I’m the Boss of all Bosses, King of all Kings. I bring the world hope, I’m why we have nice things.

    Last time I took human form, I got crucified. This time around, I won’t be so nice.

    If you think bad about me, stop trusting fake media. Go to conservapedia.com and read conservapedia.

    But even if you’re not smart enough to, or have no eyes to see, you’re still smarter than to take seriously the spambot “AZ”

  2. tyrant of all tyrants

    killer of all killers

    destroyer of all destroyers

    bully of all bullies

    hell monster of all hell monsters

  3. The Kennedy residency issue was a debacle. It didn’t have to happen. It is very easy to establish a residency and even easier to defend it. That’s because you only need to show “intent” on where you want to say is where you live. Even though Democrats control the judiciary in NY, the case was easy for them to pursue. There was no lease, no toothbrush, no payments to support a verbal contract.

    When statutory use of “residence” is to be the equivalent of “domicile,” there must be bodily presence in a place and an intention of remaining in that place; neither element alone is sufficient to create a legal residence. – McDonald v. Jenson, 596 F. Supp. 6880, affirmed 786 F.2d 1465, certiorari denied 107 S.Ct. 207, 479 U.S. 860, 93 L.Ed.2d 137, rehearing denied 107 S.Ct. 614, 479 U.S. 1001, 93 L.Ed.2d 611

  4. Bots such as AZ don’t have wishes. They mindlessly execute their programs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.