As you may know, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is running for president as an independent. He has no chance of winning, but could cause problems for other candidates given how close many races will be. But he isn’t likely to cause problems in New York, because on Monday, a judge ruled that Kennedy is not actually a New York resident, as his campaign filings claim. A group of Democratic voters challenged his nomination, and after hearing evidence, the judge found it clearly showed Kennedy’s claim to be a New York resident was a “sham.”

The court reached this conclusion despite undisputed evidence that Kennedy has a valid New York falconry license.

The ultimate issue was whether Kennedy’s campaign complied with New York’s Election Law, which sets forth the rules for state elections in a mere 952 pages of statutes and regulations. This includes nominating procedures and elections that determine how New York’s Electoral College representatives will vote, which is why the state law matters to the federal election. (As a reminder, the “Electoral College” isn’t actually a college, as some seem to believe, but the bizarre way in which the U.S. chooses its leaders. See “When Do We Graduate From the Electoral College?” (Dec. 19, 2016) (answer: not in time to avoid what happened later that day.))

For Kennedy to be nominated as an independent, his campaign had to file petitions with a certain number of signatures. According to the opinion, the relevant section “requires that each page of an independent nominating petition set forth the address of the candidate’s ‘place of residence.'” I actually think that’s debatable—the section only says a nominating petition has to look like this—but (1) it seems to be settled under New York law, (2) it wasn’t the issue in Monday’s ruling, and (3) it isn’t all that funny, so let’s go on.

The issue decided Monday wasn’t whether the petitions were required to state Kennedy’s “place of residence” accurately, but whether they did so. And there could only be one right answer for purposes of this law, which defines “residence” as the “place where a person maintains a fixed, permanent and principal home and to which he, wherever temporarily located, always intends to return” (often called a “domicile”). According to Kennedy’s petitions, he resides in New York—specifically, at 84 Croton Lake Road, Katonah, New York, about half an hour north of White Plains. It looks like a lovely home. But is that Kennedy’s “place of residence”? Let us consider the evidence.

Said consideration shall include evidence that Kennedy owns home(s) in California where he, his wife, other family members, and numerous pets have all lived for more than ten years. Now, that may seem like pretty important evidence, because it is. That’s why Kennedy filed a motion to exclude it. I was interested to learn why he contended this plainly relevant evidence should be excluded, and it turns out he … basically just said it wasn’t very relevant. He cited a case holding that the issue isn’t which of two residences is “more appropriate,” but whether the one in New York is “legitimate.” Okay, but—as he immediately conceded—evidence that your home and family (and pets) have all been in California for a decade, and still are, certainly “can be considered” when answering that question. There’s one sentence in the motion arguing that even though this might be (is) relevant evidence, offering it would “only confuse issues and result in undue delay.” I can pretty much guarantee you that the lawyer forced to write that sentence was making a face while doing it, and it wasn’t a happy one.

So, yeah, Kennedy has owned homes in California since 2014, when he got married and moved there with his wife (Curb Your Enthusiasm actress Cheryl Hines). His younger children moved there with him, as did various pets including three dogs, an unspecified number of turtles, and one (1) pet emu. A long-time employee and his family also moved to California at that time. Kennedy shares responsibility for paying utilities, taxes, and mortgages on the California properties, and is “of counsel” at a California firm. In 2021, he and Hines bought a house at 2975 Mandeville Canyon Road in California, where they and the family currently live. (The original turtles are probably now deceased, but the dogs and emu hopefully are not.) Oh, also, in two legal documents Kennedy signed in 2022, and when he filed with the FEC, he gave his address as “2975 Mandeville Canyon Road, California.”

I hope that discussion didn’t confuse issues or result in undue delay, but it does seem relevant.

But what about Kennedy’s ties to New York? After all, lots of people, especially lots of Kennedys, have more than one residence. Nothing wrong with that! So let’s consider the homes that Kennedy owns in New York.

None? None.

He had one in Bedford, but he sold it in 2012, not long before he moved to California with the family and pets. But Kennedy argued his real place of residence was still New York, based on time spent staying with friends or renting a room there. Okay, could be. Kennedy testified that he lived at his sister’s house in New York for “six months or less” before she sold it in 2015—though he was still using that address when he registered to vote in 2016. Other evidence showed that Kennedy then used the address “2 Twin Lakes Drive” for “many years” after that. But “[n]otably,” the opinion says, “Kennedy later testified that he never lived or spent time at 2 Twin Lakes Drive.” It was 1 Twin Lakes Drive, he clarified, but later conceded he hasn’t set foot there since 2017 anyway. I don’t see any evidence as to where Kennedy might have lived in New York after 2017, even temporarily.

Except for the address on the petitions, 84 Croton Lake Road. That belongs to a long-time friend. Kennedy testified that he has been renting a spare bedroom from that friend. And he has—since May of this year. But by “renting a spare bedroom,” he meant “renting a spare bedroom,” not actually going into it. Kennedy and his friend both testified that during the time he claimed to be a tenant at 84 Croton Lake Road, he slept there just once, and that was two weeks after the challenge to his petitions was filed. So he doesn’t “really have a lot of physical attachment to 84 Croton Lake Road,” as the plaintiffs’ lawyer put it, a statement Kennedy conceded was “[c]orrect.”

So, okay, the whole “personal physical presence” thing doesn’t seem to weigh in Kennedy’s favor. But what about other ties to New York? Let’s see:

• Kennedy has a Jeep registered in New York (at his accountant’s address);
• he gets some of his mail there (at his accountant’s address);
• he pays income taxes in New York (but also in California);
• he founded an environmental group based in New York (though he resigned from it in 2017);
• he still has a license to practice law in New York (but may or may not have used it recently);
• he still has a New York driver’s license (same);
• his “political gravities” have always been in New York (or something);
• and of course most importantly, he still has a valid New York falconry license.

Yes, it appears that Kennedy has maintained his New York falconry license, and he cited that as evidence supporting his residence claim. Granted, he testified that though his dogs, turtles, and emu moved with him to California in 2014, the “falcons and hawks” he owned at the time did not. (The opinion doesn’t say what happened to them, but let’s assume they and/or other falcons and/or hawks remain(ed) in New York.) Kennedy conceded that he has, or had, a California falconry license as well, but testified that it has expired. The opinion doesn’t cite any evidence that Kennedy has actually done any falconing in New York recently, but there seems to have been no dispute that his New York falconry license is currently valid.

Yet the judge gave this evidence no weight.

In fact, the court held that—even in combination with the driver’s license, vehicle registration, law license, and a valid New York fishing license—the falconry license wasn’t “relevant to establishing that … the 84 Croton Lake Road address that Kennedy listed … was his actual place of residence within the meaning of the Election Law.” Or, at least, this evidence could not overcome, you know, the lack of any “proof of [Kennedy’s] requisite physical presence at a specific address [in New York] where he intends to reside on a permanent basis,” which is what the law requires. As a result, the judge held plaintiffs had shown by “clear and convincing” evidence that RFK Jr. didn’t comply with the Election Law. He is appealing, in part on federal constitutional grounds, but if that ruling holds, he is off the ballot.

I of course am outraged. You may think “oh, falconry license, big deal,” but it turns out there’s a lot more to getting one of these than just catching a falcon and paying a fee. According to the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation, to become even an apprentice falconer one must train under the sponsorship of a master or general falconer, construct appropriate falcon housing, and pass the New York Falconry Examination with a score of 80% or higher. My friends, the New York State Falconry Examination Manual is 142 pages long, and the test includes questions such as how molting of the primary wing feathers proceeds, which species are most likely to forcibly expel excrement (known for some reason as “slicing”), and “True or false: An austringer should always change slitted jesses before flying his or her bird.” So this license isn’t easy to get.

On the other hand, to maintain it once obtained appears to require only paying a renewal fee every five years and, of course, completing and submitting the annual Falconry Report Form. So if that’s true, Kennedy’s maintenance of his state falconry license wouldn’t be especially strong support for his claim that he is, today, a New York resident.

Did I just send an email to the New York Department of Environmental Conservation to confirm that, and also to ask whether RFK Jr. has been faithfully submitting the required annual falconry report (which I strongly doubt)? I did. Will I let you know if I get an answer? I will.