Coleman extends Senate fight

[napi21]

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/16/coleman-extends-senate-fight/

Attorneys for Norm Coleman filed their final brief with the Minnesota Supreme Court Friday in the bitterly contested 2008 election that the former Republican senator lost to Democrat Al Franken by 225 votes after a partial recount.

The filing extends a protracted battle for the nation's last vacant Senate seat, which could give Democrats an effective filibuster-proof majority of 60 seats if Mr. Franken prevails


snip

Oral arguments in the case have been scheduled for June 1.

I wonder how long it will take the MNSC to rule on this? Does anyone know if they close down the court for the summer like the SCOU does? If they do, will they make their final ruling BEFORE they go on vacation? GRRRRRRRR This BS is draging on way too long!

[MADem]

1. They hear oral arguments on 1 June,

Normie wants them to keep counting the votes until he wins, or let him have a do-over:

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2009/05/coleman_files_a_2.php

The above link postulates a ruling by 31 June.

I hope Franken is seated on 1 July.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. The term ends in August, but I'm sure Franken has requested

an expedited decision. The MN Supreme Court doesn't go on an extended "vacation." One term ends on August and another starts in September, and they try to get everything out before a term ends. I would expect a decision pretty fast.

[imdjh]

3. When this is over is there some way to punish Coleman?

And why doesn't the Senate just seat Franken and get it over with?

[mykpart]

4. Excellent point! And if the SC at some later date

should rule that Al is not a senator, we can deal with the ramifications of that if and when it happens. Meanwhile, it seems that the Senate is operating unconstitutionally because Minnesota is not represented as fully as the other states.

[burning rain]

5. Senate Democrats need to use this to play hardball.

It helps justify disallowing the filibuster, because the logic of denying Franken his seat is largely based on keeping Dems from having 60, and that in turn is based on the anti-democratic idea that a supermajority should be required to pass anything significant.