Audio: Coleman hints that appeals won’t stop at state level
posted at 12:55 pm on April 17, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Norm Coleman has done quite a bid of media after the election contest panel ruled against him earlier this week. Today he appeared on Jason Lewis’ popular local radio show to talk about his argument, which he plans to escalate to the Minnesota Supreme Court next week. Coleman also hints that he won’t stop there:
LEWIS: I know “Senator Al Franken” puts about as much fear into many of you out there as all the taxation planned in the next few months and years ahead. So I thought I’d give you an updated. Joining us now is the other side to the party, Senator Coleman, who is locked in this legal battle if you will with the former comedian from Saturday Night Live. Norm Coleman welcome back to the program, hi.
COLEMAN: Good to be back Jason, thanks a lot.
LEWIS: Thanks for joining us, I know these are hectic times. Now, you’ve got a situation here where you’ve got to go to the Minnesota State Supreme Court. Your lawyers say are going to do that. When do we expect a formal appeal?
COLEMAN: We’ll file the appeal early next week, late Monday, perhaps as late as Tuesday. We’re still going over to make sure we get everything right. We expected that once we file the appeal, the Minnesota Supreme Court will set an expedited schedule for the filing of briefs, so we want to be ready for that. I do just want to note one thing Jason that nobody’s talked about: the basis of our appeal, the fundamental basis is the Constitution of the United States, it’s called equal protection and due process.
Coleman and Lewis spend most of their time talking about the implications of the Equal Protection Clause in the Constitution, which is the Bush v Gore issue that stopped the recount in Florida. However, that is an argument better suited for a federal appeal, rather than a state issue. The Minnesota Supreme Court doesn’t have to consider that argument, and frankly, I’d be surprised if it did.
Franken’s supporters claim a weird sort of federalism in the notion that absentee ballots should be considered using precinct-level standards rather than uniform state standards. That’s simply ridiculous. State law already exists on how to handle absentee ballots, and the question is whether the counties followed the existing law. One can make the argument that the variations don’t matter (although in a margin of 315 votes, they obviously did) or that no remedy exists to resolve them (which is probably true), but it’s laughable to say that precinct preferences override state law.
I’d bet that MN-SC will not address any of these issues and will stick with the we’ve-got-a-goshdarned-good-system position taken by the contest panel. I’d also bet that Coleman wastes little time making his equal-protection argument in front of a court that will take it more seriously. Most of you supported that decision in this poll — and feel free to keep voting in it:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
At this point, Franken in the Senate would only complement everything else that’s going on.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 12:57 PM
Ed, I feel your pain.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Does Coleman really want to be in on the train wreck?
unclesmrgol on April 17, 2009 at 12:59 PM
As I’ve said before. The principle of equal treatment of all ballots is important. More important than whether Coleman ever wins or not.
Once we abandon that principle, then the last hope of fair elections in this country will have been lost.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM
It’s true, lorien. The angry clown belongs in the clown car that is the 111th Congress.
Rae on April 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM
do whatever you have to to keep Stuart Smalley out of the Senate for as long as possible.
I’m cool with 99 senators
jp on April 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM
I have an idea.
If both Franken and Coleman will agree not to run again, call a do over election.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 1:01 PM
is there not anyway to settle this by calling for a special election, with only Coleman vs. Smalley/
jp on April 17, 2009 at 1:01 PM
FIGHT!
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:02 PM
At this point should I really care if Franken gets the seat? Obowa and his corrupt minions are busy destroying the country while the feckless GOP is sitting on its collective thumb.
The pols don’t care, they aren’t listening to anyone any longer and the two parties, outside of a few Pub stalwarts, are converging.
Bishop on April 17, 2009 at 1:03 PM
At this point, I am hoping that he knows there were OUTRIGHT shenanigans and this isn’t just some guy with ego clinging to a crumbling dream. How sad, if so. If not, I hope he exposes them all for what they are and we aren’t subjected to the NIGHTMARE of Frankenstein.
Mommypundit on April 17, 2009 at 1:04 PM
(at this point redux)
Mommypundit on April 17, 2009 at 1:04 PM
How would you ever expect anything to get done missing one senator…
right2bright on April 17, 2009 at 1:06 PM
I say keep Franken out as long as possible. It’s time we fought .If there were un-fair vote counts, stand up and take it all the way to the SCOTUS!
sandee on April 17, 2009 at 1:15 PM
Is anyone else tired of this…if Coleman’s group was so inept at the voting vetting process, is there any indication that they will have the talent to actually win this case or are they hoping for some “miracle”…some “hail Mary” legal opinion, if so, wrap it up. It should have never been this close if Coleman had been half a candidate.
right2bright on April 17, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Pathetic sore loser.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:16 PM
You’re right. The other 99 need to go too.
lorien1973 on April 17, 2009 at 1:22 PM
His team has clearly been inept. It is certainly his right to appeal, of course, but one has to wonder what the potential blowback is if this continues for months with clearly very low odds of a “hail mary” victory. It will be interesting to see what Pawlenty does when the time comes.
okonkolo on April 17, 2009 at 1:22 PM
Me too. I live in Washington state.
capitalist piglet on April 17, 2009 at 1:22 PM
But enough about Al Gore.
capitalist piglet on April 17, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Fight on Norm. Minnesota made a mess of the recount.
John E. on April 17, 2009 at 1:27 PM
I don’t like the precedent this is setting. How long before we get a sweep of Republican back in power, only to have a dozen defeated Dems lock up those seats in court with appeals for months? I loathe Franken, but the ROI of this battle is decreasing daily.
MadisonConservative on April 17, 2009 at 1:30 PM
Coleman lost months ago. I’m more concerned with how Tedisco is losing. I thought the absentee ballots were majority Republican?
Speedwagon82 on April 17, 2009 at 1:30 PM
Yeah Norm, go as far as you can. The more everyone hears about this the more the rest of the country realizes just how weird Minnesotans are. Some figured that Jesse was just a fluke, a loud middle finger to the establishment. But no, Minnesotans really are a weird lot.
FlyoverJ-HawkFan on April 17, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Keep fighting Norm and remember that (with props to the late great Wilson Pickett) 99 and a half just won’t do!
Dukehoopsfan on April 17, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Maybe someone can offer Smalley a cruise with the Vikings.
FlyoverJ-HawkFan on April 17, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Like he wouldn’t enjoy that.
capitalist piglet on April 17, 2009 at 1:45 PM
The line on election theft has to get drawn somewhere, this is as good a place as any.
Naked disregard for the equal protection clause must be challenged; Mark TheGreat is right.
Fight.
CPT. Charles on April 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Do over election is the answer. But of course Franken does not want that because he will lose…..big time. This is the only fair way to settle this.
Winebabe on April 17, 2009 at 1:59 PM
It’s time to go Full Bluto!
SCOTUS here we come!!!
Bruno Strozek on April 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM
Go, Coleman!
He is correct to force the hand of the SCOTUS as Coleman has standing with regard to government funding of election fraud (ACORN, etc.).
maverick muse on April 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM
This is still going on?
How in the name of God Almighty do you blow an election against Al Franken? How did this happen?
Are the people in Minnesota this friggin stupid? Is Norm this friggin bad?
I DO NOT GET IT!!
bunch of friggin idiots….
rollthedice on April 17, 2009 at 2:10 PM
Ed, Jason went national a few weeks ago. He may still be in only a few markets across the country, but calling his show “local” isn’t giving him enough credit for his incredible work and popularity across the country. Anyway, thanks for highlighting the bizarre crap we have to deal with here in Minnesota!!
shaner5000 on April 17, 2009 at 2:17 PM
Despite all that, we still love you.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 2:18 PM
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 2:18 PM
uh, not me.
Ghoul aid on April 17, 2009 at 2:46 PM
Ah, I get it now. The Coleman supporters are still in grade school.
Nonfactor on April 17, 2009 at 2:47 PM
Not to be picky or anything, but state courts can and do hear federal constitutional claims all the time. It may be given more credence in federal court, but that doesn’t mean the state court won’t hear it.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 17, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Yay for federalism!
Boo to activist judges!
Oh wait, in this case the reverse applies.
orange on April 17, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Gore appealing for recounts in Florida for five weeks = sore loser
Coleman appealing Minnesota results for five months = heroic patriot
e-pirate on April 17, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Can anyone blame him really? Who would want to go down in history as the guy who lost to Al Franken?
rollthedice on April 17, 2009 at 3:17 PM
Gore was only appealing for recounts in specific Democratic heavy counties.
Coleman is appealing to have 4400 uncounted absentee ballots COUNTED.
Daemonocracy on April 17, 2009 at 3:25 PM
A United States Senator is a member of the Federal Government. And if votes are in fact going uncounted (such as the absentee ballots Coleman wants counted) then that is disenfranchisement, which is also a Federal issue.
Daemonocracy on April 17, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Is that really much better than “Guy who ran a close tie to Al Franken and then won six months later after 8 different courts initially rejected his claims, only to have the supreme court finally decide things his way.”??
e-pirate on April 17, 2009 at 3:41 PM
When this is done and all voters were counted fairly and legally, it will be time for a “voter fraud” investagation!
ahh hell this is minnesota, the investagation would be done by the Franken/Acorn team.
allrsn on April 17, 2009 at 3:51 PM
I don’t have the links handy, but there was ample illustration of contested votes counted for Franken marked similarly to votes for Coleman that were rejected. That alone violates equal protection. There are also examples of absentee ballots accepted in districts that were heavy for Franken while similarly flawed ballots in districts that were heavy for Coleman were rejected.
Based on that, it seems that Coleman has pretty good standing for legal action.
For those idiots trying to compare this to the Florida vote grab by Gore: The situation is significantly different in that you had people in Florida trying to divine the intent of voters in order to pull a victory out of a defeat for Gore. The Florida incident revolved around the courts trying to change the rules laid out in Florida law. Here you had Coleman winning, then losing in the recount as different rules were applied to different ballots.
AZfederalist on April 17, 2009 at 4:24 PM
Norm hasn’t got a chance, but he’s gotta earn that wingnut welfare before he can quit.
starfleet_dude on April 17, 2009 at 4:29 PM
It’s a federal election, so federal laws apply. Is that a hard concept to understand?
So forcing a state the abide by clearly articulated federal standards is now judicial activism? Or is it that you just don’t understand what the words you use mean?
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Gore was creating new law as he went, on his behalf, the Florida SC threw out 100 years of precedent. Gore was the one demanding that different standards be used in different states. Gore also lost every single recount.
Coleman has both the law and precedent on his side.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM
The judicial system is not a popularity contest.
The person who gets the most courts to side with him does not win.
If the SC over rules the lower courts, then by definition the lower courts got it wrong, and Coleman was justified in his efforts. Why are you so afraid of letting this thing run it’s course?
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 4:37 PM
The Supreme Court won’t touch Coleman’s case with a ten foot pole, because it would open up a giant can of whup-ass regarding equal protection that they carefully took care not to open in Bush v. Gore back in 2000.
starfleet_dude on April 17, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Either way, it’s embarrassing.
rollthedice on April 17, 2009 at 8:12 PM
Someone has to address this type of injustice and if not the Supreme Court, then who? Equal standards must be applied.
.
Don’t forget there was a third candidate, a conservative, who got over 15% of the vote. Thus, the state voted overwhelmingly to the right. To have Frankin come out as the victor is not properly representing the will of the voters.
.
The Minnesota public should demand a run-off vote. To let Frankin and George Soros’ “Secretary of State Project” implant Mark Ritchie (a former big time community activist), steal the 725 vote Coleman election night victory is outrageous.
.
see:
http://www.secstateproject.org/
JeffVader on April 18, 2009 at 12:08 AM
Pawlenty should be calling for a new vote but he’s too afraid of looking “partisan”.
So Norm should go the full distance. Let Franken be the one to discredit Gore’s Florida position. That will make for beautiful hypocrisy.
budfox on April 18, 2009 at 10:01 AM
norm do not stop fighting even if you fail in court start running again .i can not believe people are putting up with this garbage
wade underhile on April 18, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Take it to the Supreme Court so that the Supremes have the opportunity to overrule Bush v. Gore. That case is an embarassment.
The whole 2000 election mess should have gone to the House. Same outcome. Instead we’ve got this ugly precedent on the books, and every close election gets resolved by our judicial masters.
Rev Snow on April 18, 2009 at 11:22 AM
And another thing. In parallel with the Supreme Court erasing its Bush v. Gore error, the state houses need to wake up and take notice that elections lack precision. It can and will happen that the margin of difference between leading candidates will be less than the margin of error of the ballot counting. In such cases, the continued pursuit of “let’s count again, and try to get it right this time” is wrongheaded. It’s a tie. Neither candidate has a just claim on victory. Start from that position, and craft some resolution that doesn’t send us into judicial limbo. Runoff election would be fine. Flipping a coin would be fine. Boxing match between chosen champions would be fine. Endless efforts seeking “the true count” of the tied contest are complete wastes and should be ended everywhere the law still prescribes them.
Rev Snow on April 18, 2009 at 11:30 AM