BREAKING NEWS: Minn. court declares Franken leading vote-getter

[Top Cat]

By BRIAN BAKST
The Associated Press
Monday, April 13, 2009; 7:56 PM



ST. PAUL, Minn. -- A Minnesota court has confirmed that Democrat Al Franken won the most votes in his 2008 Senate race against Republican Norm Coleman.

Monday's ruling isn't expected to be the final word because Coleman previously announced plans to appeal to the state Supreme Court. He has 10 days to do so. That appeal could mean weeks more delay in seating Minnesota's second senator.

After a statewide recount and seven-week trial, Franken stands 312 votes ahead. Franken gained more votes from the election challenge than Coleman, the candidate who brought it.

The state law Coleman sued under merely required three judges to determine who got the most votes and is therefore entitled to an election certificate. That critical certificate is on hold pending appeal.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/13/AR2009041302383_pf.html

[MADem]

1. Pawlenty hasn't ruled out being an asshole and withholding the certificate if

Coleman "takes it federal."

[Aloha Spirit]

3. What are the serious voting rights infringements that would make the Supreme Court even take this?

I don't get it.

Yes the voting process is imperfect if not still discriminatory, but it seems to me if this case gets heard by the Supreme Court, then there are many many other cases that should be as well.

[MADem]

8. You gotta get it to the Supremes before they kick it back.

That's a long road if they can get away with delaying.

I think some amicus briefs need filing, here--the citizens of the state are being harmed by only having half a voice in the Senate.

Coleman's in "denial land" if he keeps this shit going--it will be solely meanspiritedness if he does.

I can't see the Supremes even agreeing to hear this, but, like I said, you have to start down that long road before you even ask them. I wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong (I'm no "Supreme" being, nyuk, nyuk) but I would envision the Supremes just turning it down, refusing to hear it, without comment. Coleman cannot use Bush v. Gore as a justification for asking them for a hearing either--they said, from the git-go, that B v G was a one-off and did not establish any precedent.

[Another Bill C.]

11. It's strictly to delay seating a Democrat

As nearly as I see it, Coleman's argument is: if an absentee ballot that should have been rejected under a strict interpretation of the law was accepted anywhere in the state, then all ballots similarly rejected should be allowed.

Coleman refutes the ruling of the Election Contest Court because they insisted on a strict interpretation of the law thusly violating the equal protection rights of those whose absentee ballots were rejected per the above.

So far, I haven't seen any actual evidence to support the Coleman claim and suspect they are going to ask the Minnesota Supreme Court to do the actual evidence fishing. So far, the Coleman efforts have only resulted in more votes for Franken.

[Top Cat]

6. Coleman will take it federal anything to prolong seating Franken

[MADem]

12. I suspect your surmise is correct. I think he's got his marching orders. NT

[ShadowLiberal]

17. Yet Federal will be relucant to step in if MN judges keep ruling unanimously on things

More then anything, continued unanimous decisions by the MN state judges make the Supreme Court taking the case unlikely from what I've read, as it'll leave them with much less wiggle room to justify it. Often when the Supreme Court hears a case it's because the lower courts have made contradictory rulings on the matter.

[Matariki]

2. What exactly is he appealing?

I mean apart from the obvious sense of entitlement?

Is he trying to throw votes out or count votes that weren't counted? Or is he trying for a new election?

[Aloha Spirit]

4. Pawlenty pretty much admitted that they just want to prevent seating another Democrat as long as

possible.
That was his Maddow interview.

[Matariki]

5. That seems true - but what excuse is he using for an appeal?

[Aloha Spirit]

7. I think he will argue that because different standards were used in different counties

to judge the validity of a ballot, (same as happens everywhere all the time)--now let me clarify, everybody had to follow the same rules for judging whether ballots were good or not, but people can still have different judgement--that voting rights were abused and therefore the election should be redone.

[Top Cat]

10. You maybe right that would allow Coleman to prolong the race....

[MADem]

13. You know, I'm old, I don't have a lot of money and I am short on time lately too...

....but if they did a do-over on Franken, I'd be motivated to haul my ass to Minn and help out in any way I could. And I'd pay my own fucking way, too--that's how annoyed I am over this nonsense.

[Aloha Spirit]

14. Me too! Massachusetts, man, we did an amazing job with NH last fall too.

I read this AP article, it says something about the Senate being able to "judge the qualifications of its members."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gMpTmr96V5hKIfyHT4Av4jsVQgrQD97HTHAG0

[MADem]

16. Yeah--if Coleman managed to cheat his way through this, I'd love it if

the Senate refused to seat his ass. Dunno if they can get away with that, though, if he has "valid credentials." We just went through this with the Burris mess!

[Top Cat]

19. They'll have no chose but to seat him and the will suffer a huge back lash

[mdmc]

9. My Man!

[Thrill]

15. Franken should ask the Supreme Court to grant him a Cerf. while the appeal goes on.

HE SHOULD BE SEATED

[Cha]

18. Can you win any other way than

getting the most votes? 'Cause I'm not seeing it.

Why wouldn't you be declared the biggest sorestLOSER of all time if you appealed after the votes gave it to your opponent?