Minnesota Election Court Rejects Coleman’s Latest Gambit

|
January 23, 2009 12:39 p.m.
EDITORS' NOTE: TPM is making our COVID-19 coverage free to all readers during this national health crisis. If you’d like to support TPM's reporters, editors and staff, the best way to do so is to become a member.

Earlier this afternoon the special three-judge panel in the Minnesota election contest dealt Norm Coleman a defeat, denying his campaign’s motion to authorize a full inspection of ballots and voter rolls that would have delayed the start of the trial on Monday.

Had the court granted the request, it would have helped the Coleman team’s efforts to look around the state to find ballots for himself or to have ballots for Franken thrown out. If the Coleman team was celebrating yesterday’s denial of Franken’s effort to dismiss the whole case, this ruling shows that things won’t be so smooth for them, either.

This excerpt from their opinion could give us a good idea of the logic the new court will use going forward: “The Court determined that it has jurisdiction over this matter in its Order Denying Contestee’s Motion to Dismiss. Contestants, however, have not met their burden of showing that an inspection is needed to prepare for trial.”

Translation: We might have found that Franken didn’t meet the burden of proof necessary to throw out Coleman’s arguments, but in this example Coleman hasn’t met the burden necessary to win them.

Comments
advertisement
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Senior Editor:
Special Projects Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Publishing Associate:
Front-End Developer:
Senior Designer: