The end is near: Coleman-Franken trial commences

Norm Coleman (WDCpix)

This is the end. Or so it would seem.

More than two months after election day, following a manual statewide recount, a trial to determine the winner of the U.S. Senate contest commenced at the Minnesota Supreme Court this afternoon. Norm Coleman is seeking to have the results certified by the state Canvassing Board, showing Al Franken with a 225-vote lead, tossed out. Franken wants to head to Washington.

With Coleman in attendance, attorneys for the two campaigns made their opening arguments before the three-judge panel charged with hearing the case. Joe Friedberg, representing the Coleman campaign, was up first. Displaying a folksy charm honed in dozens of jury trials over the years, Friedberg argued that the election process and ensuing recount were rife with errors that have distorted the outcome.

Most significant are 12,000 rejected absentee ballots, many of which the Coleman campaign believes should have been included in the vote tally. Friedberg argued that the panel must personally inspect the 12,000 ballots in order to determine which ones were improperly rejected. “This is going to be extremely tedious and extremely boring,” he allowed.

Friedberg further argued that different standards were utilized in counties across the state to determine whether an absentee ballots was rejected, comprising a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s equal-protection clause. This is the same argument that prevailed before the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore during the 2000 presidential contest.

“We want you to do what the law demands you do under Bush v. Gore, which is level the playing field,” Friedberg said.

Kevin Hamilton, a veteran of the legal battles over Washington State’s 2004 gubernatorial contest, then delivered opening arguments for the Franken campaign. He stated that the process — although not without flaws — was as fair as humanly possible and that the Coleman campaign’s assertions were wildly off the mark. Hamilton insisted that there’s absolutely no justification for tossing out the results certified by the Canvassing Board.

“This is a breathtaking step that should and does require breathtaking evidence,” he said. “At the end of the day the evidence to be presented in this trial falls woefully short of that required to overturn the state canvassing board’s certification.”

With opening arguments completed, a five minute break was taken. Then Coleman’s legal team called its first witness: Coleman campaign staffer Kristen Fuzer. The trial is expected to go on for weeks.

More: Franken-Coleman trial upended by judges’ ruling