Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

5K rejected Minn. Senate ballots get another look

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 09:51 PM
Original message
5K rejected Minn. Senate ballots get another look

5K rejected Minn. Senate ballots get another look

AP – In a Sept. 3, 2008, file photo Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., speaks at the Republican National Convention …
Slideshow: Minn. Senate Race Play Video Presidential Transition Video: Tapper on Obama's Embarrassing Day ABC News Play Video Presidential Transition Video: Taking Responsibility FOX News ST. PAUL, Minn. – The judges in Minnesota's Senate election trial threw Republican Norm Coleman a lifeline on Tuesday, opening the door to adding nearly 5,000 rejected absentee ballots to a race that Democrat Al Franken leads by just 225 votes.

It wasn't a total victory for Coleman, who had wanted the judges to look at about 11,000 such ballots. He also has to prove the absentees were unfairly rejected, and it's likely that Franken would gain votes from the pile too.

But his attorneys had said the absentees were the centerpiece of his court challenge, and they cheered the ruling.

"This is a victory for thousands of Minnesotans whose rejected absentee ballots will now be properly reviewed in this election," Coleman attorney Ben Ginsberg said in a prepared statement.

While the judges limited Coleman's field of potential new votes, they allowed many more ballots than Franken had wanted. His attorneys had argued Coleman should be limited to about 650 — the specific figure given in his initial Jan. 6 lawsuit.

The judges, however, ruled that the Jan. 6 filing laid out additional categories of ballots that should be examined.

The judges said they would look at two categories of rejected absentees: those where it appeared the voter had met the legal requirements, and those where voters might have run afoul of the law through no fault of their own.

The judges agreed to consider 4,797 rejected absentee ballots because that was the number Coleman said in a Jan. 23 filing met one of those two conditions.

In a separate order later Tuesday, the judges made clear that Coleman would have to prove at trial that each questioned ballot was wrongly rejected in order for it to be counted.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090204/ap_on_re_us/minnesota_senate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Veritas_et_Aequitas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. It's never going to end. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rwheeler31 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. Are these real judges, this is getting stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. They'll Keep Counting and Recounting Until Coleman Pulls Ahead, then Stop
If Coleman never gets ahead, they'll keep counting until Franken's term expires.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. So, do you claim to know a lot about MN law and its judicial system and judges?
Why not go to the MN state forum here and ask the posters there because I am sure they might have some actual informed answers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC