North Carolina Supreme Court removes Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from ballot

In the latest legal battle shaping the 2024 presidential election, the North Carolina Supreme Court has voted 4-3 to remove Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from the ballot. The decision in favor of the former independent presidential candidate was made by four Republican justices, despite opposition from Democrats, who accused the majority of abdicating their judicial role.

“Neither party in this case disputes that plaintiff has filed a withdrawal from his candidacy,” Judge Trey Allen said in a ruling Monday for the majority. Kennedy suspended his campaign last month and announced his support for Republican candidate Donald Trump.

“Therefore, a vote for plaintiff in this election does not count under the law,” the majority found, adding that if Kennedy's name appeared on the ballot, “it could disenfranchise countless voters who falsely believe that plaintiff is still a candidate for office.”

The decision could delay the mailing of postal ballots by several weeks.

The majority acknowledged that expediting the printing of new ballots “will require significant time and effort on the part of our election officials and significant costs to the state.” But it also said it was “a price the North Carolina Constitution requires us to pay to protect the fundamental right of voters to vote their conscience and to make that vote count.”

Although this result appears to have some logic at first glance, the dissenting justices argued that the majority was, at best, not entitled to reach this conclusion.

Although he called the majority's analysis “perfectly reasonable,” fellow Republican Richard Dietz wrote in his dissent that the court's role was to “follow the law as it is written.” He explained that while state law allows a party's candidate to withdraw at any time before the state sends out the ballots, this is different from withdrawing the candidate's name. REMOVED from the ballot paper.

In separate dissenting opinions, the court's two Democratic justices were less sympathetic to the majority.

Judge Anita Earls expressed her concerns in writing

She said Kennedy filed for removal too late and the court gave him “special treatment.”

Along with fellow Democratic justice Allison Riggs, Earls described Kennedy's tactics as part of a strategy to avoid running in certain swing states while fighting to stay on the ballot in states like New York.

“The rules of our elections allow such attempts to rig the presidential election system if they are made far enough in advance, but it is not fair to the rest of the state to disregard state election laws to pursue a short-term political strategy,” Earls wrote. “Even a second-grader knows it is not fair to change the rules mid-game just because you fear you won't win.”

On the other hand, Kennedy failed on Monday in his attempt to stay in the swing state of Michigan.

Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for updates and expert analysis on the most important legal issues. The newsletter will return to its usual weekly publication when the next Supreme Court term begins in October.