Democrats seek to toss Robert F Kennedy Jnr, others off Georgia ballots as new trial opens

“The court found, by clear and convincing evidence that petitioners had shown that his New York residence was a sham used for political purposes,” lawyer Adam Sparks said after a Monday hearing in Atlanta. “He doesn’t live there. He claimed to on each and every sheet of his petition here in Georgia. That’s improper. It invalidates the petition, full stop.”

But a lawyer for Kennedy presented Michael Malihi, an administrative law judge, with Kennedy’s voting history as evidence of his New York residency.

“Mr Kennedy has been a lifelong resident of the state of New York,” lawyer Larry Otter said.

Sparks also challenged Kennedy’s status as an independent. He argued that because Kennedy is running as the nominee of several parties in other states – including Kennedy’s own “We the People Party” – that Kennedy does not qualify as an independent under Georgia law.

“They circumvent requirements for qualification in Georgia by gaming the system,” Sparks said.

Otter said the other parties are not present in Georgia.

Democrats are also challenging ballot places for independent candidate Cornel West, the Green Party, which has nominated Jill Stein, and the Party for Socialism and Liberation’s Claudia De la Cruz.

Georgia counties determined that Kennedy, West and De la Cruz each collected at least 7,500 signatures to qualify. Stein hopes to use a new Georgia law awarding a ballot place to candidates of a party that qualifies in at least 20 other states.

Malihi heard two challenges to Kennedy on Monday, as well as a challenge to De la Cruz. He will hear challenges on Thursday to West and the Green Party. Malihi will issue findings to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who will make a final ruling. A decision must be made before Georgia mails military and overseas ballots beginning on September 17.

Lawyers for Democrats argue each of De la Cruz’s and Kennedy’s 16 electors needed to file separate nomination petitions. Lawyers for the candidates disputed this interpretation on Monday, saying it is wrong to believe each campaign needs 120,000 signatures.

A lawyer for Democrats said the petitions have illegal formatting errors, and argued that just because Raffensperger’s office accepted them does not mean they are legally sound. De la Cruz’s lawyer said the judge should defer to the agency’s interpretation

Estevan Hernandez, a Georgia volunteer for De la Cruz, criticised Democrats for challenging other candidates with technical arguments, saying it’s “an undemocratic manoeuvre”.

“One rich lawyer with the backing of the Democratic Party machine is trying to override the clear intent for these 15,000-plus people to have Claudia De la Cruz on the ballot,” Hernandez said after the hearing.

Georgia is one of more than half a dozen states where challenges have been made by Democrats and allies to Kennedy’s petitions. Kennedy’s campaign says it has enough signatures for ballot access in all 50 states.

In the additional New York suit, plaintiffs argue nearly all of the more than 145,000 voter signatures collected by Kennedy’s campaign to qualify for the ballot are invalid.

They claim some signatures do not properly list an address, are illegible or are signed by non-registered voters, among other issues. They also claim representatives for Kennedy’s campaign knowingly concealed the candidate’s name when soliciting signatures from voters.

Kennedy is expected to testify in the New York trial on Wednesday and possibly into Thursday. His vice-presidential running mate, Nicole Shanahan, is expected to testify remotely.

In Pennsylvania, challengers contend Kennedy’s false address for nominating papers disregards state law. A lawyer for Kennedy said the challenge contained specious allegations. A court will conduct a hearing on Tuesday.

Robert Wittenstein, a suburban Atlanta man who brought one of the challenges against Kennedy, declined to say who was paying for it. The other two challenges heard on Monday were coordinated by the state Democratic Party.

Clear Choice Action, a Democrat-aligned political action committee, has backed the lawsuits in New York and some other states.

“The truth of the matter is, I think people ought to play by the rules, and that’s important,” Wittenstein said after the hearing.