pawlenty-maddowGov. Tim Pawlenty has been all over the map about his readiness to issue an election certificate after a ruling by the Minnesota Supreme Court in the Norm Coleman-Al Franken election contest: He will, he might, he might wait, and so on. Here are nine quotes from Pawlenty on the topic, dating from January to June.

First, a bit of context. Under Minnesota law, the governor issues and signs an election certificate for the winner of a U.S. Senate race. The Senate has ultimate control over seating its members and so far Senate leaders have seen fit to wait for that piece of paper from Minnesota. Now the quotes:

Jan. 12:

I have a duty to follow state law and our statutes are clear on this issue. I am prohibited from issuing a certificate of election until the election contest in the courts has been resolved.

March 26:

If I could appoint a temporary senator, I would, but Minnesota law, unfortunately, doesn’t allow for that… [I won’t sign an election certificate until] the law requires me to do so.

April 6:

The Minnesota Supreme Court said, in a recent decision, that a certificate shouldn’t issue — or isn’t likely that it should issue until the state court process has run its course. That would include the appellate process. It’s pretty clear that one side or the other’s going to take that next step [of appealing to state Supreme Court] … and it wouldn’t be appropriate for me or anyone else to step in front of it. It’s frustrating that this has taken so long, but we need to get a proper and just and accurate and legal result, and it’s going to take, it looks like, a few more months to get that.

April 9 (in reply to Rachel Maddow’s question, “If Mr. Coleman appeals to the state Supreme Court, and then the state Supreme Court rules that one of these two men have won the election, you will sign an election certificate then, won’t you?”):

It’s premature to say that, Rachel, based on a number of factors. And the factors include this: Number one, the state court could hold in abeyance, or a “stay” in legal terminology, its own decision for a period of time to allow for a federal appeal. I don’t know that they’ll do that, but they might. The federal courts, if they accept the case, might stay the state court proceedings. And we also want to have a chance to see what the case would look like at that point in terms of how harshly or strongly the issues have been decided or dealt with by the Minnesota Supreme Court. Keep in mind Norm Coleman could also win that appeal, so this issue could be turned around on Al Franken pretty summarily if it goes that direction. … I think the state court will do a good job and a fine job, but there are some equal protection issues that are federal equal protection issues. … I will evaluate it genuinely and seriously at that point, but it’s really quite unfair to say what will you do in advance of all that.

April 13:

I also would want to look at what the courts did with the case in terms of leaving issues for potential appeal, the strength of those issues, how directly and effectively they addressed them … I’m not saying that I’m going to, or not going to, issue the certificate at that point. I just want to make sure I have all the facts in front of me before I made a decision like that. … [It could be] June or later [before the state courts complete the Coleman-Franken case].

May 7:

[The case going beyond the state courts] is one of many scenarios. So if the question is, “Will you sign the certificate exactly the day the Minnesota Supreme Court decides,” well, if the court process at the state level is continuing than I am prohibited to sign it. So it is more involved than just that one day that one moment. There are other factors here.

May 20 (in a letter replying to Democratic National Chairman Tim Kaine):

Some of your Democratic colleagues and members of the media have inaccurately stated that an election certification is being withheld. That is not the case. … As a fellow Governor and attorney, I am sure you can appreciate that such commitment would be premature. … The Minnesota Supreme Court might remand the case to the three-judge panel and ask them to consider various issues that were raised in the election contest.

June 2 (in reply to a reporter’s question about the election certificate):

I think you guys have really over-baked that issue. You’re really spinning out of control on that. I’m gonna do whatever the court says. [If ordered to sign the certificate] I’m not gonna hold it up or delay it in any fashion.

June 3:

Minnesota law does not allow the governor to sign an election certificate until the state court process is complete. And when it is, and they direct me to sign the certificate, I’m going to sign it. There’s not going to be any undue delay or the like. But I’m going to follow the direction of the courts in that regard and we’re going to be having a decision here in the coming weeks …  I have to follow the law. If the Minnesota Supreme Court says, “You sign the certificate” — and there’s not an appeal or some other contrary direction from a federal court — you know, that’s my duty. I can’t just ignore that or say I don’t feel like following a directive from the Minnesota Supreme Court. That would not be the responsible thing to do.

For the record, here is the statute Pawlenty cited in his original statement back in January:

Minnesota Statutes 204C.40 CERTIFICATES OF ELECTION.

Subdivision 2. Time of issuance; certain offices.

No certificate of election shall be issued until seven days after the canvassing board has declared the result of the election. In case of a contest, an election certificate shall not be issued until a court of proper jurisdiction has finally determined the contest. This subdivision shall not apply to candidates elected to the office of state senator or representative.