Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd denied a motion Monday seeking to block Democratic state Rep. Nima Kulkarni from appearing on the general election ballot this fall.
Shepherd’s order was issued shortly before the deadline for Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams to certify all of the general election candidates for county clerks around the state. Adams did so shortly after 4 p.m.
Adams is a defendant in the lawsuit, which sought an injunction blocking him from certifying Kulkarni as the Democrats’ nominee in the Louisville district. The lawsuit also sought for Shepherd to order Adams to certify the co-plaintiff, William Zeitz, as the rightful Democratic nominee.
Shepherd instead denied the plaintiffs’ motions, allowing Adams to certify Kulkarni as a candidate on the general election ballot. His order stated that the plaintiffs “have presented a substantial legal question on the merits, but the balance of the equities, and the public interest, weigh decisively in favor of denial of injunctive relief.”
County election officials must print ballots by next Monday, though the Jefferson County Clerk’s office indicated in a hearing Monday in Shepherd’s courtroom that they plan to print their ballots Tuesday of this week.
Steve Megerle, the attorney for Zeitz, has already appealed the ruling to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, seeking injunctive relief.
James Craig, the attorney for Kulkarni, said Shepherd’s ruling “was right on the law, and elections matter.”
“The law is clear, Kulkarni won her party’s nomination unanimously, and the voters of District 40 have twice rejected Zeitz to represent them.”
The second plaintiff seeking to block Kulkarni’s nomination is Dennis Horlander, the former state representative who first challenged Kulkarni’s eligibility in this year’s Democratic primary due to a filing error. Horlander served the same Louisville district in Frankfort for two decades, until Kulkarni defeated him in the 2018 primary and beat him again by a large margin in a 2020 rematch.
Horlander’s original petition seeking to disqualify Kulkarni from the primary was first dismissed in Jefferson Circuit Court, but later granted by a unanimous decision in the Kentucky Court of Appeals days before the primary, which disqualified her.
The Kentucky Supreme Court stayed that appeals court ruling the day before the primary election, allowing it to go forward until the justices could review the case. Kulkarni won the primary over Zeitz with 78% of the vote.
However, the Supreme Court issued an order in June siding with the appeals court, ruling that disqualified Kulkarni. The high court released their full opinion in August, after which Adams said he would declare a vacancy in the race and direct the local Democratic and Republican parties to choose general election nominees.
A committee of the Louisville Democratic party quickly selected Kulkarni as its nominee, while the Jefferson County Republican Party declined to select a general election candidate.
Megerle originally attempted to request the Jefferson Circuit Court issue an injunction blocking Adams from declaring a vacancy in the race and order him to declare Zeitz the nominee. He later withdrew those motions and filed a new lawsuit in Franklin Circuit Court seeking the same actions, but with Zeitz now a co-plaintiff.
Megerle said his clients appreciated Judge Shepherd’s prompt ruling, but disagreed with the order stating that Zeitz was not harmed by Adams’ declaration of a vacancy in the race.
“The vacancy and the court’s decision invokes the death penalty on Zeitz’s candidacy,” Megerle said.
Plaintiffs and defendants in the case made oral arguments in Shepherd’s courtroom Monday morning, less than a week after the lawsuit was filed.
In his order Monday, Shepherd stated that Adams was “vested with the authority” to certify a vacancy in the Democratic primary and he “granted appropriate deference to local party officials to nominate the person of their choice to fill the vacancy under KRS 118.105.”
Noting the current time crunch to settle the matter of the case, Shepherd said that Zeitz “had many months to challenge Ms. Kulkarni’s qualifications, and he chose not to do so.”
“In the circumstances of this case, the public interest requires denial of injunctive relief, which would thwart the will of the voters, as well as the will of the political party whose nomination is at issue.”
This story has been updated to include additional details.
State government and politics reporting is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
