Coleman Turns to Courts (again) as Minnesota Recount Nears End

[babylonsister]

Coleman Turns to Courts as Minnesota Recount Nears End
By Emily Cadei, CQ Staff


Minnesota election officials are plowing ahead in the latest phase of the Senate recount, despite a late legal challenge by Republican Sen. Norm Coleman .

Local election officers are set to wrap up a week-long review of improperly rejected absentee ballots Friday and forward the results to the state canvassing board for counting. The board plans to count ballots over the weekend, then hear challenges from both the Coleman campaign and Democratic challenger Al Franken on Monday and Tuesday. After that, it intends to certify a winner of the Nov. 4 elections — at last.

Election officials hope this will be the end of a recount process that began in mid-November, after initial returns showed Coleman leading by 215 votes over Franken. State law mandates a hand recount in any race for federal or statewide office in which the margin in less than one-half of 1 percentage point.

The state Supreme Court could derail the board’s plan, however, if it agrees to a motion filed by the Coleman campaign Wednesday evening. Coleman’s attorneys dropped a New Year’s Eve bomb, asking the court to modify the review of rejected absentee ballots because of a lack of uniform standards in deciding which ballots should and should not be counted.

“With inconsistency and disenfranchisement taking place in the current process, we have no other option than to ask the Minnesota Supreme Court to intervene and ensure that no voters are disenfranchised and that consistent standards are taking place,” Coleman attorney Fritz Knaak said in a statement late Wednesday night.

There is no word yet on when the court will rule.

more...

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=news-000003002251

[ThomWV]

1. Wouldn't they first have to prove that "inconsistency and disenfranchisement" are taking place

It seems to me that if they can't prove that inconsistency and disenfranchisment are taking place or that somewhere there is a ruling that it is taking place then they have no argument.

[Gregorian]

2. Those ballots were on view for all of the public to see.

Even if there were no uniform standards, from what I saw every ballot that was counted for Franken was undeniably marked for Franken.

Law is a dark pit. I'm going through a lawsuit right now, and it's dreadfully complex and blurry. I honestly think attorneys have caused much more damage than they have curbed.


Go Franken!

[ThomWV]

3. I watched for 2 days myself. A beautifully open process and indisputably fair

Both sides right there, every ballot examined, decisions made in full sunlight. Just as it ought to be.

[Idealism]

5. Which is why Franken will hold the seat next

When all the votes get counted, Democrats seem to win. Strange, no?

[Gregorian]

6. This brings a much needed smile to my face today.

My whole life is just hanging at the mercy of courts and county planners. It's all good. But just terribly hard to endure. Your comment brings a bit of confidence. I look forward to Senator Franken.

[loveable liberal]

4. Norm is pathetic. This is why he needs to go.

He is a weasle.

[droidamus2]

7. I've heard this argument somewhere before

Oh Yeah this is one of the same arguments that the Bushies used against Gore in 2000 to kick the election to the Supreme Court. 'Oh gee we're not sure exactly what constitutes a hanging chad so this can't be fair'. Of course they were the only ones that had a problem with hanging chads because if they were counted Bush would have lost. Coleman's argument is BS on the surface they aren't trying to protect voters from disenfranchisement they are trying to disenfranchise them. I am sure if asked their solution would be 'oh maybe we should just not count any of these absentee ballots. That means we would win well... that has nothing to do with why we support that solution'. I can't wait till Franken is installed in the Senate so that slime Coleman and his minions will shut up.

[TexasObserver]

8. Coleman is trying to lay the predicate under Bush v. Gore

That's why they've made the claim and used the language they've used. They plan to take this to the Supreme Court in an attempt to steal the election, like Bush stole Florida.