Minnesota's Senate race now comes down to five votes

By PAT DOYLE, Star Tribune
May 30, 2009

Almost seven months after a U.S. Senate election that was too close to call, five justices of the Minnesota Supreme Court will hear arguments Monday on whether problems with absentee ballots justify reversing a lower-court ruling that declared DFLer Al Franken a 312-vote winner over Republican Norm Coleman. Partisans across America will be watching, pronouncing judgment on a thousand blogs. The case may cast a blinding national spotlight on the state Supreme Court. A decision upholding the lower-court ruling could end the protracted struggle and allow Franken to join the Senate, giving Democrats an invincible majority. A ruling for Coleman wouldn't return him to the Senate, but could keep his hopes alive and delay a final decision for months.

Minnesotans want the dispute to end, recent polls show. Most people say Coleman should concede. Nearly two-thirds believe that Franken ultimately will be declared the winner. But several former Minnesota Supreme Court justices say current members will consider the case carefully, ignoring outside publicity and pressure.

(snip)

While Monday's hearing will produce yet another dramatic climax in this seven-month saga, some believe it will be mostly anti-climactic for the justices, who weeks ago received detailed briefs from the lawyers in the case... The court will have two fewer members hearing the case than its usual seven because Chief Justice Eric Magnuson and Associate Justice G. Barry Anderson sat on the state Canvassing Board for the recount and have declined to participate in related court proceedings.

(snip)

On Monday, each side will have 25 minutes for arguments, with Coleman allowed an additional 10 minutes for rebuttal. He has the burden of proving that the three-judge panel that heard the trial made sufficient mistakes to overturn their verdict.

A Supreme Court decision could take days to months, with the prime options being upholding the lower court ruling for Franken or reversing it and ordering the panel to reconsider aspects of the case. The court "cannot say that Coleman won," said University of Minnesota constitutional law expert Fred Morrison. "A Coleman 'victory' in the Supreme Court would mean several more weeks or months of more recounting-type stuff." Aside from attacking the merits of Coleman's case, Franken argues that the Republican's key claims should be dismissed because he didn't bring them early enough in the trial.

(snip)


http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/46508587.html

dems or indys(Ventura). Any idea?
BTW in fairness to Minnesota, from what I have seen most of your governors until Pawlenty have been pretty moderate on either side of the aisle.

though they are appointed to a lower court, I think.

Will post this on the Minnesota board

The Supreme Court Justices:
Chief Justice Eric J. Magnuson - appointed by Pawlenty (recusing himself from this)
Justice Alan C. Page - elected in 1992. (The DFL would have loved to have Page step in for Wellstone in 2002)
Justice Paul H. Anderson - appointed by Arne Carlson
Justice Helen M. Meyer - appointed by Ventura
Justice G. Barry Anderson - appointed by Pawlenty (recusing himself)
Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea - appointed by Pawlenty
Justice Christopher J. Dietzen - appointed by Pawlenty

As a rule, the State Supreme Court has put itself above politics. Given that 2 of Pawlenty's appointments are taking themselves off this decision because of their past involvement in the recount gives me confidence that the remaing justices will decide this on the facts.

The man is probably the leading expert in the state on Minnesota appellate practice. Attended a CLE he taught a few years ago and he is incredibly bright. Justice Anderson is a friend of a retired judge that I clerked for and is also a top-flight jurist. Minnesota can be proud of its courts, which is more than a lot of states can say.

Of the 5 judges 2 of them have been attacked by liberals as too biased against Franken, one of the two donated some money to Coleman's reelection campaign (before becoming a judge on the state supreme court). I forget what's not liked about the other by liberals.

Then another 2 of the 5 judges have been attacked as too biased in favor of Franken. I know of them, a Ventura appointment, is a clear liberal who has been very friendly with democrats before becoming a judge on the court. I forget what they didn't like about the other judge.

Only one of the 5 judges has managed to avoid the wrath of either side for being too biased.

Despite this though, I've read that most of the state supreme court judges in Minnesota are republican appointees, I'm pretty sure at least one of the two who served on the recount commission was a GOP appointee, and you saw how just about all their decisions were unanimous.

From what I've read in an article at politico, it's actually fairly common in their state for people who become judges on the state surpeme court to go from politicians clearly favoring one side, to nonpartisan judges.

that screens applicants for court positions and makes recommendations to the governor of multiple qualified candidates. Judges are appointed and run for election every six years. I worked in the judicial system here for three years as clerk to two different trial judges and have to say that our judiciary is top notch.

rather than from the posters here who spew their own opinions yet are clueless about the MN election process or its judiciary. Both the election process in MN and its judiciary are top notch and this election was bizarrely close for the amount of votes cast.