On August 23, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., notified the Pennsylvania state court that is hearing the ballot access challenge that he is no longer seeking to defend his Pennsylvania ballot position.
See the filing here.
10
On Friday, August 23, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., spoke in Arizona for almost an hour. We said he is suspending his campaign but that he will keep his name on the ballot in all but ten battleground states. He said that if the U.S. had an honest election system, inclusive debates and a better media, he could have won. He endorsed Donald Trump based on his disagreement with the Democratic ticket on three issues: health, the Ukraine war, and censorship of social media. He did say that he has serious disagreements with Donald Trump.
It is clear to those who watched the entire speech that the issue closest to his heart is declining health in the United States. He painted a bleak picture of the prevalence of chronic disease and contrasted today’s situation with the situation sixty years ago.
He erroneously said that his campaign had collected more signatures than any other in U.S. history. Actually his campaign did not collect as many signatures as the 1992 Ross Perot campaign, and perhaps several others. Because Kennedy was nominated by ballot-qualified minor parties in California and Florida, and because presidential ballot access has eased since 1992, he did not face the same ballot access barriers that some others in the past have faced. On the other hand, no other candidate has been challenged over ballot access procedures as much as Kennedy this year, except for Ralph Nader in 2004.
On August 22, the Alaska Supreme Court issued a one-sentence order, keeping the initiative to repeal top-four on the ballot. The initiative petition had been challenged on various technical grounds. The lower court had ruled in favor of the initiative backers, and the Alaska Supreme Court agrees, and will issue a full opinion later.
The Montana Libertarian Party has sent in paperework to list Chase Oliver as the party’s presidential nominee. Normally this would not be newsworthy, but in this case it is. Earlier the state party had said it would not place anyone on the ballot for president.
On August 22, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order in Republican National Committee v Mi Familia Vota, 24A164. Arizona requires people filling out a voter registration form to attach proof of citizenship. This would be a birth certificate for many persons, but for others it would be a copy of naturalization papers.
The legality of this Arizona restriction is pending in the lower courts, but in the meantime, the U.S. Supreme Court says the state can enforce its law for people who want to vote for state and local office. For people willing to vote only for president and congress, during this interim period, the state cannot block them from registering even if they don’t provide proof of citizenship. That is because those persons can use the federal voter registration form, with no need for attachments.
Four justices would have blocked the state from enforcing its law, for all offices, while the case is pending.
Three justices would have let the state enforce its law, in the interim, for all voters.
Two justices said the state can enforce its law for some times of offices but not others. Here is a description of the ruling, and a copy of the ruling, from ElectionLawBlog.