DETROIT – The Michigan Court of Appeals has denied the petition of Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Nasser Beydoun to have his name placed on the ballot for the August primary election. This decision follows his disqualification by state election authorities due to a technical error in his nomination petition.

The Michigan Board of State Canvassers voted 4-0 last week against certifying Beydoun’s candidacy for the Democratic primary, citing the use of a P.O. Box address on the headers of his signature petitions instead of his residential address as required by law.

In rejecting Beydoun’s appeal, which argued that Michigan’s petition law is unclear, a three-judge panel unanimously concluded in a brief opinion issued last Friday afternoon that the law “is not ambiguous” and mandates candidates to include a street address or rural route in their petitions.

“We find no ambiguity in MCL 7.215(C)(1), and conclude that this statute requires candidates to list either a street address or rural route on nominating petitions.”

The court’s decision will remove Beydoun from competing in the Democratic primary on August 6, leaving the race to U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Holly) and African American actor and author Hill Harper.

Commenting on the court’s decision, Beydoun, who aspired to become the first Muslim to run for the U.S. Senate in Michigan, indicated that he “is still considering his next options, including running as an independent, launching a write-in campaign or endorsing another candidate.”

“We are deeply disappointed,” Beydoun said. “It’s just another bureaucratic way to keep voters out of the process. What difference does it make if there is a P.O. Box on the form? It has no impact on the outcome of the signatures. There were 24,000 people who wanted me on the ballot, but they kicked me out of the race over a P.O. Box.”

On Friday, the court  highlighted the petition form as stipulated in the relevant law by the state legislature, noting that in the place of the candidate’s address: “street address or rural route.”

“No other options were provided, and there was no mention that a P.O. Box is a third option,” the panel wrote. “Instead, the system provides only two options, neither of which is a P.O. Box.”

Beydoun’s attorney had argued in his filing that the nomination petitions were compliant with state law requiring the candidate’s address, contending that a P.O. Box fits within the definitions in both Merriam-Webster and Black’s Law dictionaries as “a place where mail or other communications are sent.”

His attorney argued that P.O. Boxes are safer on nomination petitions than residential addresses in “an era of political violence”, pointing out that Beydoun’s “strong” opposition to the Israeli war on Gaza has made him a target for threats and publishing his home address, “puts another target on his back.”

The court stated that “while we are not unsympathetic to the public policy argument made by the plaintiff, this court is not the appropriate forum to seek relief in this regard.”

The court noted that the law does not require the use of the candidate’s residential street address on nomination petitions and that other provisions found that the street address of the candidate’s private law practice and the candidate’s campaign committee headquarters comply with the address requirements.