Staff Reports
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is facing a peculiar predicament that highlights the absurdity of election laws. Despite endorsing former President Donald Trump, several states have decided to keep his name on the ballot for the upcoming election, and this isn’t just a minor inconvenience—it’s a full-blown circus. The Supreme Court recently denied his appeal to withdraw, leaving him to fend for himself in the chaotic world of election law. When it comes to running for office, it seems some candidates can’t withdraw even if they want to. Who knew democracy could be this complicated?
In an incredible twist, Kennedy has taken legal action against election officials in swing states like Michigan and Wisconsin after they rebuffed his attempts to pull out. These officials must have been channeling their inner bureaucrats when asserting that minor party candidates don’t have the luxury of opting out. What’s more, the Wisconsin Elections Commission ruled five to one that a candidate filing nomination papers essentially locks them into the race. Talk about a one-way ticket to political obscurity.
A spokesperson for Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson made clear that, according to her department’s understanding of the law, Kennedy’s name will remain on the ballot. The message? If you’re a minor party candidate, better think twice before you throw your hat in the ring or else you might find it permanently stuck on your head. This illustrates a rather one-sided interpretation of election laws that heavily favors maintaining the status quo rather than accommodating individual choices, especially when that individual endorses someone like Trump.
NEW at SCOTUS: RFK Jr. loses emergency pleas to have his name removed from the ballot in Wisconsin and Michigan. No public dissents in the first, but Justice Gorsuch dissents in the Michigan case pic.twitter.com/dxF6U5JDVX
— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) October 29, 2024
Interestingly, a member of the Wisconsin Elections Commission didn’t shy away from expressing his doubts about the situation. He asserted that there seems to be some sort of game being played between Trump and Kennedy, insinuating that their decision to involve the courts over such a trivial matter is a calculated move. When officials believe they can read the minds of candidates, one might wonder if they’re just looking for a power trip instead of enforcing fair electoral practices.
Meanwhile, in North Carolina, Kennedy endeavors to legally challenge his predicament as well, only to be met with logistical arguments about why removing his name isn’t as simple as hitting the “print” button. The North Carolina State Board of Elections Executive Director outlined the complexities involved in the ballot printing process, making it sound less like an administrative task and more like launching a rocket mission. With every twist and turn, Kennedy’s struggle reveals the quirky, often farcical nature of America’s election laws, where simplicity goes out the window and candidates find themselves entangled in red tape. Perhaps it’s time to reevaluate these nonsensical rules that turn political endorsements into legal entanglements.
