The petition, filed just 10 days before Election Day, follows similar last-minute requests in the battleground state Wisconsin, where Kennedy also seeks to withdraw, and New York, where the Supreme Court previously denied his emergency request to remain on the ballot due to residency issues.

Kennedy’s legal team argues that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s refusal to remove him from the ballot conflicts with state law and infringes on his constitutional rights. Benson previously said Kennedy’s efforts to remove himself were too late, and the state Supreme Court said he could not point to any specific “source of law” that justified his case.

His application states that “the Secretary’s decision to belatedly add a withdrawn candidate to the ballot, over the candidate’s objection no less, was head-scratching, unnecessary, and lawless.”

In Michigan, Kennedy’s campaign suspended operations and requested withdrawal in August, but his team claims Benson ignored their efforts to prevent voter confusion by moving to keep his name on the ballot after the statutory deadline for such changes had passed.

Kennedy’s case in Michigan echoes his similar efforts in Wisconsin, where the state’s Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision to keep him on the ballot.

The former Democratic-turned-independent presidential candidate argues Wisconsin’s ballot requirements unfairly compel him to remain listed as a candidate, violating his First Amendment rights by effectively forcing him to endorse his campaign against his will. “In Wisconsin, he wants everyone who will listen to him to vote for Trump,” his filing explains, adding that any ballot listing his name interferes with his intended message of support for Trump’s campaign.

As ballots have already gone out in Wisconsin, and with high early voting turnout, it remains unclear how the Supreme Court could implement any last-minute changes if Kennedy’s request is granted.

In Michigan, Kennedy’s team has asked the justices to either issue an injunction to remove him from the ballot until the case is resolved or to take up the issue now under expedited review, though recent rejections to similar requests like the New York petition may suggest the justices will follow a similar pattern.