So far this election season, the Supreme Court has blocked former independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and that of the Green Party Jill Stein from appearing on the ballots in New York and Nevada, respectively. The judges too partly on the side of the Republicans‘ attempt to enforce Arizona state law requiring documentary proof of citizenship in order to vote.
We may find out more in the coming days about how the Roberts Court will take up voting rights cases before Election Day – and perhaps after.
After losing his quest to get on The vote in New York, Kennedy it’s urgent the judges to catch him out the ballots in Wisconsin and Michigan. Voting is already underway in those swing states, and the Supreme Court could inject chaos into those crucial races if it sides with the former independent candidate, who has suspended his campaign and is backing Republican Donald Trump. The states’ responses to Kennedy’s requests are expected Monday afternoon, so we can quickly find out what the justices will do.
The judges could also intervene on appeal Virginia And Pennsylvania Unpleasant purging voters and limit provisional ballotsrespectively. Both cases may be important in their own right and also indicate how the judges deal with broader issues about how courts can intervene close to elections and the power of state legislators.
Even if none of these appeals are successful or ultimately determine the outcome of the election, how the justices decide them could be telling. That includes whether judges will disagree with any dismissals or make accompanying statements on broader legal principles that extend to any post-election litigation.
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal newsletter for expert analysis of the week’s top legal stories, including Supreme Court updates and developments in Donald Trump’s lawsuits.