Supreme Court denies Green Party candidate Jill Stein Nevada presidential ballot
CARSON, NEVADA: The Supreme Court rejected Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein’s request to appear on the Nevada presidential ballot on Friday, September 20, a key swing state for the upcoming election.
The court’s decision leaves in place an earlier ruling by the Nevada Supreme Court, which blocked Jill Stein from the ballot due to a paperwork dispute.
Jill Stein's Green Party was blocked over paperwork error
The Green Party’s appeal sought a last-minute intervention, arguing that their removal from the ballot was unfair and based on an administrative error. However, the US Supreme Court declined to step in.
"The application to vacate injunction presented to Justice Kagan and by her referred to the Court is denied," the courts unsigned, one-sentence order read, NPR reports.
The Nevada Supreme Court had ruled against the Green Party after the state’s Democratic Party challenged the certification of the party’s candidates for the ballot.
The dispute stemmed from an incorrect “ballot initiative” form being provided to the Green Party by the Nevada Secretary of State’s office in July 2023. The form, which lacked the required sworn registration statement, led to signatures being deemed invalid.
Nevada Court's rules against allowing Green Party's ballots over 'unfortunate mistake'
The Nevada Supreme Court acknowledged the error but ruled five-two that it did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation.
"An unfortunate mistake" was not enough to allow the party’s candidates onto the ballot, according to the court's decision.
The Green Party argued that its candidates were "wrongfully ripped from the ballot" and called for emergency intervention from the Supreme Court.
However, the Supreme Court, in a brief and unsigned order, rejected the appeal.
State argued allowing Jill Stein could harm election integrity
Nevada’s Attorney General Aaron Ford, representing the state, warned that any changes to the ballot this late in the process would create confusion among voters.
Ford noted that ballots had already been mailed out and altering them at this stage "would undermine the integrity of Nevada’s election," according to court filings.
The Green Party’s lead attorney in the case was Jay Sekulow who previously represented former president Donald Trump in his first impeachment trial, according to The Hill.
Sekulow argued that the Green Party was simply seeking "justice and vindication of its rights" after being misled into using the wrong form by a state employee.
Internet reacts to Jill Stein's exclusion from ballot
The decision sparked mixed reactions online with some questioning the fairness of the US electoral process. One user on Facebook remarked, "How does it make sense to have a candidate for a national election only on the ballot in certain states in the first place?"
"With so much at stake, voting for a third party would be like taking an exam and answering 'All of the above' on a True or False question," another wrote.
"Democracy in the United States. How charming," added another. "Same people who were okay with Trump and RFK not being on the ballot are upset at this," one comment read.
In swing states, third-party candidates like Jill Stein can have a significant impact by drawing votes that might otherwise go to major party candidates.
In this case, Stein's absence from the Nevada ballot could potentially benefit Democratic nominee Kamala Harris, as some of her votes might have gone to Stein, NBC News noted.
This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online
