« CHRIS COLEMAN FOR MAYOR OR GOVERNOR? | Home | DFL GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATES »
COLEMAN RECOUNT UPDATE: “COLEMAN FOR SENATE STATEMENT ON TODAY’S COURT DECISION”
By Ryan Flynn | February 18, 2009
ST. PAUL – Coleman for Senate legal counsel Ben Ginsberg today made the following statement regarding the election contest panel’s ruling denying our request to file a motion to reconsider.
“In denying the request to file a motion to reconsider, the court creates a real problem for itself and the reliability of these proceedings. The court in its Friday the 13th order ruled illegal under Minnesota law categories of ballots which results in thousands of already counted ballots now being called “illegal” by the judges.
The order means the judges have now found illegal ballots they themselves allowed in just three days earlier among the Nauen intervenors.  And under the court’s ruling, some 100 illegal ballots are included in the 933 ballots counted by the Canvassing Board and thousands more in the counties election night totals. The net effect of this ruling is that the court has declared thousands of votes illegal – but by virtue of its unwillingness to reconsider its motion, intends to allow those illegal votes to be included in the count.
This fatal inconsistency serves to disenfranchise some voters while allowing others with the same ballots to have their votes counted. The judges will need to certify at the conclusion of the trial the number of “legally cast ballots” in the U.S. Senate election for each candidate. However, their ruling, as well as testimony in the trial, shows that they cannot do this as a matter of law since illegally cast ballots under their definition are included in the counts.
The net effect of the court’s February 13th ruling, and their decision today to not reconsider this ruling, is a legal quagmire that makes ascertaining a final, legitimate result to this election even more difficult.
###
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 16 Comments »
16 Responses to “COLEMAN RECOUNT UPDATE: “COLEMAN FOR SENATE STATEMENT ON TODAY’S COURT DECISION””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
February 18th, 2009 at 4:39 PM
So, for those keeping score, Coleman now believes:
- The canvassing board (including two minnesota supreme court justices)
- The state’s election officials; and now
- The three judge panel
are all incompetent.
For wanting Minnesotans to determine who Minnesota’s senator should be, he sure as hell isn’t willing to accept the decision of any Minnesotans.
Also, who’s brilliant idea is it to openly criticize judges you have an active case before?
February 18th, 2009 at 4:45 PM
This is such a “gimme” ace in the hole to the Coleman camp I wonder if this tribunal isn’t just tossing it over the wall to the Supreme Court.
In any case, even if Coleman doesn’t prevail in this contest, Franken can forget about setting his depends into a US Senate seat any time soon.
Personally, where a despicable human being the likes of Al Franken is concerned I’ll take comfort where I can.
February 18th, 2009 at 4:55 PM
PD,
Coleman’s arguments have certain merit. Without question, some votes were counted twice. And without question, inconsistent standards HAVE been applied at various stages of this ordeal.
At the same time, the remedy is a bit ridiculous. Coleman can’t necessarily identify which ballots are inconsistent anymore. So what is the remedy? To throw out the election? … Not likely.
More so than any of the groups you mentioned, it is Coleman’s attorneys/advisers who have been incompetent…. that, and Richie’s brilliant rigging of the contest phase have put Coleman out in the cold.
There are still 3500 ballots in play. His focus should be there.
February 18th, 2009 at 5:23 PM
“Coleman’s arguments have certain merit. Without question, some votes were counted twice.”
Without question? I haven’t heard a single piece of evidence that without question votes were counted twice. I haven’t even seen evidence that it was probable. More importantly, this ruling by the Court isn’t even DIRECTED at Coleman’s duplicate argument.
“And without question, inconsistent standards HAVE been applied at various stages of this ordeal.”
Again, who cares? The only “inconsistencies” have been within the realm of granted discretion. Discretion is by nature inconsistent. The question is whether there has been an abuse of discretion. Tell me how you have a consistent standard related to the comparison of signatures, for example. Nor have I seen a single example where Coleman has produced ballots that have been counted in one county but rejected in another when the question isn’t one of discretion, ie, no signatures on the ballot. As you noted, to the extent they were counted, that would be error by the county that cannot be corrected (you can’t unring the bell of counted absentee ballots because you can’t match a ballot to an envelope). The remedy isn’t to count 100 more wrong ballots. Coleman’s argument is stupid and the Supreme Court, the canvassing board, and now the three judge panel have recognized that.
“More so than any of the groups you mentioned, it is Coleman’s attorneys/advisers who have been incompetent…. that, and Richie’s brilliant rigging of the contest phase have put Coleman out in the cold.”
I agree Coleman’s attorneys have been terrible. But, what basis do you have to say Ritchie rigged anything? Ritchie didn’t pick the canvassing board. The two justices on the board volunteered for the job, the SOS office merely sent a request to the Court to offer up two justices. Same is true for Ramsey County. Nor do I see how Ritchie possibly rigged the recount with 4 distinguished judges sitting on either side of him. You can argue Ritchie is a partisan all you want, but, Ritchie was one of 5 votes. He didn’t shift the recount decisions any more than the multiple republican appointee judges on the panel did.
“There are still 3500 ballots in play. His focus should be there.”
I suspect that’s a load of crap as well. There’s a reason Coleman’s attorneys as throwing a hissy fit (and, his attorneys did so in Court as well). He knows the number under the Court’s order is much much smaller.
February 18th, 2009 at 6:29 PM
All he’s doing is setting the stage for an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Not that Al wouldn’t be doing the same thing if he were contesting the race.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:43 PM
“Without question? I haven’t heard a single piece of evidence that without question votes were counted twice.”
I won’t apologize for your deafness, stupidity and blindness. There are over 100 votes that have been demonstrated to have been counted twice. It’s impossible, at this point, to pull them from the pool, however.
““And without question, inconsistent standards HAVE been applied at various stages of this ordeal.â€
Again, who cares?”
You should. And you would if different standards were being applied to add votes for Coleman and take them from Franken, I know you would.
It’s o.k. though MOUTHdem, you lack the integrity it requires to be intellectually honest on the matter. For that matter, you barely have the intelligence.
“The remedy isn’t to count 100 more wrong ballots.”
That I agree with… and so stated. The remedies are worse than the complaints.
“But, what basis do you have to say Ritchie rigged anything?”
Richie cynically named the Republican judges from the Supreme Court and Ramsey Count (the only court with jurisdiction over this election contest) to the canvasing board, thus removing them from the contest phase… ensuring the bodies would be dominated by Democrats should there be a contest.
Like I said, you’re too stupid too understand. It was a calculated move by Richie… and politically brilliant too, really.
“Nor do I see how Ritchie possibly rigged the recount with 4 distinguished judges sitting on either side of him.”
I never said he did. He manipulated the contest phase, knowing full well the limits of the canvasing board… which bared out. He ran the limited functions of the canvassing board just fine. I’ve never stated other wise.
It’s o.k. MOUTHdem, I recognize the limits of your capacity as well.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:49 PM
Once they determine that they can’t remove the illegal ballots, the next step is to declare the U.S. Senate election void and have Governor Pawlenty appoint a Senator. The sooner, the better.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:50 PM
I’m really getting impatient here. Why is this process taking so long in an era that is on the verge of proving and measuring the traces of dark matter? Why can’t technology be used to compare absentee ballots? They have had over 100 days why couldn’t the State hire someone to make customized software to aid in matching and sorting? This is a United States Senate race folks. I think this election and the election contsetment phase case warranted funded aid in getting this thing right using top professionals. The private sector and those top tech professionals working in government could accomplish this. The Genome has been mapped for god’s sake. Duplicate and designed DNA is synthetically manufactured. 20 million dollars would be more than enough to get an accurate result. But this won’t happen because gosh golly gee it’s just a United States Senate election. Can’t these judges delegate this important (assuming it can be funded) work. This I guess is about the law not about problem solving. These judges can only suddenly develop a narrow jurisprudence when stuck on how to remedy this problem. Do people really comprehend what is at stake in a United States election? I don’t think they enough people do and I gather the judges don’t think so either and don’t want to be “inappropriate” less it piss off a large percentage of people who voted for Al Franken. I bet right now there are a bunch of super geeky freaky high tech brainiacs people on blogs discussing how easy it would be to remedy this absentee ballot fairness issue and the double counting. The right people with the right technology can perform the services needed.
It’s a choice (do we fund the forensic services) not a impossability by a long shot. This election contest is on its back like a turtle, its scrambling four legs in the air. Priorities….yes I think we all need to set better priorities…United States Senate elections should be very, very high on the crucial list of emergency funded priorities when needed. This is a one in 50-80 year happening for god’s…sakes can’t these judges wake up and do their jobs….do them well. I won’t hold my breath. This election is a joke.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:03 AM
I think a special election is in order…I really think in this case it would be very appropriate.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:40 AM
Of course you think a special election is in order. Norm’s chances are slim and none, and slim just left town.
Minnesotans understand that there is a human factor in all elections, and so the longer Norm pretends there isn’t, the longer he delays the inevitable.
The only special election we should have is to see if Norm is allowed to stay in Minnesota once he loses. I, for one, don’t want him bagging my groceries or washing my car.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:50 AM
PR, if they call a special election, maybe we can recall Ritchie at the same time?
February 19th, 2009 at 9:03 AM
“Richie cynically named the Republican judges from the Supreme Court and Ramsey Count (the only court with jurisdiction over this election contest) to the canvasing board, thus removing them from the contest phase… ensuring the bodies would be dominated by Democrats should there be a contest.”
Except this never happened. Ritchie and the SoS office did not pick the judges. They sent a request, as they always do, to the Supreme Court and Ramsey county for two judges/justices. The Courts then give him two names. For example, the two Supreme Court justices for the canvassing board volunteered for the job, they were not selected by Ritchie.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:51 AM
I believe you Plydumb. How would Ritchie have time to do that and plan strategy with ACORN?
February 19th, 2009 at 9:57 AM
“Once they determine that they can’t remove the illegal ballots, the next step is to declare the U.S. Senate election void and have Governor Pawlenty appoint a Senator. The sooner, the better.”
This is the stupidest thing I’ve seen said on this board in a long time. We should disenfranchise 3 million voters because MAYBE a couple of votes were tallied inconsistently with the current Court order? Brilliant. So, it’s your position that an election judge can sabotage an entire election by merely wrongly counting a single ballot, and, when the election doesn’t turn out how he likes, mentioning that he made a mistake. Void the election!
February 19th, 2009 at 11:26 AM
There are no “illegal” ballots in this dispute. All of the ballots in dispute were lawfully cast; at question is whether an absentee ballot that was received conformed exactly to statute and rule.
The problem for Coleman is that every county and municipal election official believed he/she was accepting or rejecting absentee ballot in accordance with Minnesota law. There are certainly some examples of election officials in different jurisdictions applying the standards prescribed in law differently. In retrospect, it is quite possible that the standards prescribed in statute are too subjective but,nevertheless, those were the standards in place last November.
For Karen: Nothing has happened in this election that would even come remotely close to establishing grounds for ordering a new election! Nor is there anyway to declare the seat vacant since the Canvassing Board has established a “winner”. By filing a contested election suite, the Court will decide one way of the other on which absentee ballots will be counted. In any event, the governor would not name a new senator, there would be a special election to fill the seat.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:54 PM
Plymouthdem wonders: “Again, who cares?”
1.45 million Minnesotans care.