The Wisconsin Supreme Court appears to have overlooked key arguments in hastily rejecting former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s appeal seeking to have his name removed from the Badger State’s November ballot.
Late last month, the court shrugged off Kennedy’s request to block a Dane County Court ruling affirming the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s decision to keep the Trump-supporting RFK Jr. on the ballot. The leftist-led state Supreme Court claimed Kennedy failed “to address the merits of his appeal.”
“We emphasize that we are not making any legal determinations on our own regarding the claims made by Kennedy and we are not agreeing with the circuit court’s legal conclusions on those claims,” the majority wrote in its ruling. “We simply are unable to make such determinations, given the inadequate briefing presented to us.”
In a motion seeking reconsideration, RFK Jr.’s attorney respectfully — in legal parlance — argues that the court overlooked the detailed legal arguments filed in the case in coming to the conclusion that the briefing was “inadequate.”
“Election cases, especially this time of year, are always rushed. And in this case’s haste, with two interlocutory appeals and a non-conventional briefing schedule from the Court of Appeals and a bypass petition, things can get lost,” Madison attorney Joseph Bugni, Kennedy’s legal counsel in the Wisconsin ballot case, wrote in the motion.
The 11-page brief notes Kennedy’s legal arguments were by necessity truncated earlier in the appeals process on the court of appeal’s request. That’s where
