Justice Alito Refused Cornel West’s Request in Pennsylvania Ballot Access Case

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito denied Cornel West’s request for write-in campaign notices in Pennsylvania, dealing a blow to the independent candidate’s presidential aspirations days before the election.

At a Glance

Justice Alito rejected West’s emergency appeal for polling place notices about his write-in candidacy.
West’s removal from the Pennsylvania ballot stems from incomplete paperwork.
The denial follows similar rejections for other independent candidates.
West argues Pennsylvania’s election rules violate his First Amendment rights.
The decision likely ends West’s efforts to gain ballot access in Pennsylvania.

Alito’s Swift Denial of West’s Emergency Appeal

In a brief but consequential decision, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito rejected Cornel West’s emergency appeal to require Pennsylvania polling places to post notices informing voters of his write-in candidacy for president. The denial, issued without explanation, effectively closed the door on West’s efforts to gain visibility on Election Day in the crucial swing state.

This decision follows a series of legal setbacks for West, who was initially removed from the Pennsylvania ballot due to incomplete paperwork for his candidacy. The state’s Supreme Court ruled on September 16 to exclude West from the ballot after finding that he failed to submit affidavits for 14 of his 19 presidential electors, a critical requirement for ballot access.

Cornel West loses Supreme Court bid to get on the Pa. presidential ballot https://t.co/MXODuMCM0M

— PennLive.com (@PennLive) November 1, 2024

West’s Constitutional Challenge and Ballot Access Struggle

West’s legal team argued that Pennsylvania’s election rules violate his First Amendment rights by unfairly restricting minor-party candidates’ access to the ballot. They contend that including more candidates promotes political debate and serves the public interest. However, these arguments failed to sway lower courts or Justice Alito.

Despite the setback, West maintains that he has a constitutional right to be considered by Pennsylvania voters. He suggested that the cost of notifying voters at polling stations is justified due to the alleged violation of his rights. However, the courts have consistently ruled against last-minute changes to election procedures.

Implications for the 2024 Presidential Race

The denial of West’s appeal is part of a broader trend of the Supreme Court rejecting ballot access appeals from independent candidates. Recently, similar requests from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Jill Stein were also turned down. These decisions collectively reinforce the challenges faced by candidates outside the two major parties in gaining ballot access and voter attention.

West’s removal leaves only four candidates on the Pennsylvania ballot: Donald Trump, Kamala Harris, Jill Stein, and Chase Oliver. Political analysts suggest that West, a professor at Union Theological Seminary who identifies as a socialist, could potentially draw more votes away from Vice President Kamala Harris than from former President Donald Trump, adding an intriguing dynamic to the electoral landscape.

As the 2024 presidential race intensifies, the Supreme Court’s consistent stance on ballot access issues signals a reluctance to intervene in state election procedures, especially close to Election Day. This approach, while frustrating for independent candidates, aims to maintain electoral stability and prevent last-minute disruptions to the voting process.