Supreme Court asks to hear from Franken, counties before ruling on Coleman’s suit

By Chris Steller
Friday, January 02, 2009 at 2:35 pm

The Minnesota Supreme Court ordered (pdf) Friday afternoon that the campaign of Democrat Al Franken respond by 9 a.m. Saturday to Republican U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman’s Dec. 31 petition to start over on the current court-ordered effort to count wrongfully rejected absentee ballots. The justices also directed seven Minnesota counties to tell the court whether they reviewed additional rejected absentee ballots the rival campaigns want counted — and if not, why. (In regional meetings this week, Sherburne County officials, for example, refused to consider three additional ballots the Coleman campaign asked them to review.)

The court’s order left open the possibility of calling for oral arguments as it considers Coleman’s petition. It also made it clear that the justices won’t have new instructions for the State Canvassing Board before the secretary of state’s staff starts opening and counting absentee ballots from around the state on Saturday morning.

Categories & Tags: | | | | | |

Comments

6 Comments

kyle keleher
Comment posted January 2, 2009 @ 8:41 pm

Coleman should do what he himself asked Franken to do right after election night seeing that he had the lead at the time, “Do the people of Minnasota a favor, and resign your candidacy”!


jonerik
Comment posted January 3, 2009 @ 12:21 am

The honorable thing would be for Coleman to resign his candidacy. His argument about “double counted” votes for Franken is truly a lie and if he somehow manages to manipulate that lie into six more measly years before the US Senate, he will certainly not bring honor to that body. And the US Senate is not a body which can afford any more scum bags.

I wish there was more information on this recount matter. I haven’t seen anything about Pawlenty’s position other than about the “veto” of each campaign to recounting some votes. Legally, Pawlenty and Coleman sound right but I have no way of knowing whether that makes any difference at this point.

It is a serious problem when rumors and misinformation become embroiled in a judicial decisionmaking over elections.


Chris Steller
Comment posted January 3, 2009 @ 12:35 am

jonerik, Pawlenty has weighed in a few times, first repeating some false rumors about mishandled votes, then correcting that with some words about the recount’s fairness, then saying he was looking into how it would work if he were to appoint someone but not expecting to do so, and now this. For more information about the legal side of the recount, one place to go is the Supreme Court’s recount page, where the various motions, petitions and orders are listed and linked in reverse chron order, and grouped by case. The ruling now guiding the handling of wrongly rejected absentee ballots is the Dec. 18 order. Besides that, there are also a couple of election law blogs. Otherwise it’s the usual local suspects you probably already visit.


jonerik
Comment posted January 3, 2009 @ 10:53 am

Thank you, Chris. I’ll check out those links.

I tried keeping up with this and then got distracted by the holiday madness. I was only drawn back in when I read about Cornyn and Coleman’s argument about some votes being “double counted”and I tried to make sense of it and couldn’t. I then realized that this recount is a high-stakes level game in which even professionals and those following it closely were not getting. At this point, I think it’s more important that the process be right and be perceived as right than who wins. I was and am willing to listen to Coleman’s arguments. If he’s just out to trash the process because he lost which it’s looking like he’s trying to do, then a pox on him.


Coleman's Mistress
Comment posted January 3, 2009 @ 12:29 pm

So, now T-Paw says what everyone knows, that his appointees on the Supreme Court
are idiots, they have tried to destroy the recount process, but somehow he expects to rise
above the stink by his late statement of how it ain’t right.

Well, he is the source of the stench, a skunk is a skunk, that is his nature.


Mary Moldenhauer
Comment posted January 5, 2009 @ 5:19 pm

Yes, the appointees to the supreme court are idiots just like most of Duluth judges. This has been a joke how so many people from Minnesota could have even allowed this race to be so close. The people in their right minds knew this would happen with this race. Grow up and respect the governor. He did not know the appointees would turn out the way they did just like me having bad employees. I can get ride of bad employees easier than the Governor can ride Minnesota of these idiots.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.