Rejected ballots headed for state Supreme Court (MN Recount)

[Doughboy71]

Source: Star Tribune

The campaign of Sen. Norm Coleman is taking its case to the state Supreme Court, asking the justices to order counties to follow a standard procedure in identifying wrongfully rejected absentee ballots. It is asking county officials to halt any counting of rejected absentee ballots from the U.S. Senate election until the justices can rule on the campaign's request.

The campaign said that it feared what it called a chaotic "Florida situation" and that it is likely to go to the court today.

The announcement came just hours after the state Canvassing Board, which is overseeing the recount in contest between Coleman and Democrat Al Franken, voted unanimously to ask election officials in all 87 counties to identify and count improperly rejected ballots. Board members stressed that they only have the authority to make a recommendation and not to issue an order.



Read more: http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/36043514.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUX

---

I think Coleman is worried the rules WILL be followed like it should have been in Florda in 2000.

[robinlynne]

1. Florida 2000 my ass! (except for the Republicans not wanting real ballots counted. That IS

a repeat performance.)

[wellstone dem]

2. And remember the canvassing board is made up of two republican appointed

supreme court judges, one district court judge appointed by independent jesse ventura, one district court judge who got the seat by election, and the democratic Secretary of State.

[creeksneakers2]

3. If Coleman wins

the different counties can't be forced to count the same way, so Coleman will go back to court saying the entire absentee ballot count is invalid because its not all done in an identical way.

Coleman is a sneak.

[JDPriestly]

4. The Constitution states that the Senate judges elections for senators

not the courts.

[No Elephants]

5. It's not cut and dried. Amendment XVII to the COTUS states:

Amendment XVII
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislatures.


When vacancies happen in the representation of any state in the Senate, the executive authority of such state shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.


This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution. "

(Before that amendment, the COTUS stated that state legislatures chose the Senators from that State.)

BUT,


Article I, Section 5 of the COTUS states in pertinent part:


"Section 5. Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member."

In the 1969 case of Powell v. McCormack, though, the SCOTUS interpreted the analogous powers of the House to qualify duly elected Representatives rather narrowly. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=395&invol=486