RFK Jr. will fight his exclusion from the New York ballot by claiming it is unconstitutional to force him to declare his place of residence

• RFK Jr. officially announced that he has appealed an Albany judge's decision to bar him from the New York ballot.

• The judge had declared Kennedy's nomination petition invalid because he had provided a fictitious address in upstate New York.

• RFK now plans to refile a dismissed lawsuit claiming it was unconstitutional to force him to disclose his residency.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is appealing his disqualification from the New York presidential election because he used what an Albany judge called a “fake address” in his nomination petition. He argues that forcing him to provide his place of residence is unconstitutional.

In an appeal filed Wednesday, Kennedy suggested the strategy may have been what one state election law expert called a “bizarre” one.

New York State's election law violates the Constitution because it requires “a candidate for the office of United States President to indicate his 'place of residence' on his nomination petition,” the five-page statement states.

The constitutional provisions governing federal elections do not require such an address, the announcement states.

“The Constitution sets out the qualifications of a president, and the states cannot expand those qualifications,” Kennedy's attorney Gary L. Donovan told Business Insider.

Kennedy's appeal was filed in response to a 34-page ruling by New York State Supreme Court Justice Christina Ryba, who found on Monday that the independent candidate lives in California but falsely claimed he lives about 40 miles north of Manhattan in northern Westchester County. The false statement invalidated Kennedy's nomination petition, the judge ruled.

The guest room that Kennedy rented without a lease in a friend's home in Katonah, New York, was not a “real and lawful residence but merely a sham address that he adopted to maintain his voter registration” and pursue his political ambitions, she wrote in her decision.

Kennedy actually lives in California with his wife, “Cut It, Larry!” actress Cheryl Hines, the judge noted after presiding over a four-day non-jury trial last week.

During his testimony in court, Kennedy was “shown a photograph of the guest room he allegedly rented,” the judge wrote in her decision. “He testified that neither the furniture nor the bedding belonged to him.”

He also testified that he planned to one day move into the guest room with Hines, his extensive book collection and his many exotic pets – including his raven – when Hines retires from acting, “when the timing is right,” according to an excerpt from the transcript.

“If not, I will find a house nearby,” he added from the witness stand.

A “bizarre” appeal

“This is bizarre,” said former Democratic New York State Senator Martin Connor, a 50-year voting rights advocate, when he learned of Kennedy's appeal and its claim that the Constitution protects him from having to provide an address.

According to Connor, residency requirements in New York's election law have become much more relaxed over the years, but candidates still have to provide a specific address somewhere in the state “that can be proven to be yours and is more than just a post office box,” he said.

Election officials need to know where to contact a candidate if his or her election application has deficiencies, and if someone wants to challenge the election application in court, they need to know where to send the documents, he said.

“The real question is: without an address, how can we figure out who the hell you are?” Connor said. “What if there's more than one John Smith – or more than one Robert Kennedy?”

Connor argued that the Constitution does not require presidential candidates to provide their addresses – and states are not required to do so – and noted that the Founding Fathers left the details of elections to the states. “The Constitution does not mention how to get on the ballot in New York or any other state. But every state has rules about that,” he said.

Kennedy first claimed last month that New York State's election law was unconstitutional because it required candidates filing nomination petitions for president or vice president to have an address. “The constitutional provisions for federal elections do not mention a residency requirement,” his lawyers argued.

Shortly before the trial began, however, the judge rejected this claim. She then stated bluntly that Kennedy's alleged speech was a complete fabrication.

In her decision, she wrote that “Kennedy's testimony that he did not own any of the furniture, bedding, or other decorative items in the guest room, as well as his testimony that his wife and family, his extensive book collection, and his wide assortment of domestic and exotic pets all remained in California, provided further compelling evidence that Kennedy lacked the requisite physical presence and intent to remain” at the residence.

The lawsuit challenging the 70-year-old candidate's nomination petition was filed late last month by a group of New York voters backed by Clear Choice Action, a Democratic-aligned super PAC.

According to Mother Jones, the group has identified 18 states where Kennedy's turnout could face similar challenges.

Read the original article on Business Insider