The Al Franken campaign is taking its effort to get their guy an election certificate to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Monday, Franken lawyer David Lillehaug sent a letter to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and Gov. Tim Pawlenty urging them to sign an election certificate.
Then and today, in a conference call with reporters, Franken’s Washington, D.C.-based lawyer Marc Elias, said his interpretation of Minnesota law and federal law compels Ritchie and Pawlenty to sign that petition.
“All we are seeking,” Elias said, “is something that all Minnesotans ought to insist on, is that they have full representation in the United States Senate during this time of great legislative activity in Washington, D.C.”
The conflict in the law is this.
One subdivision says that “In an election for United States senator, the governor shall prepare an original certificate of election, countersigned by the secretary of state, and deliver it to the secretary of the United States Senate … if a recount is undertaken by a canvassing board pursuant, no certificate of election shall be prepared or delivered until after the recount is completed.”
Well, the recount is completed and Franken is ahead. Franken’s side argues the governor “shall” sign the certificate.
But, the very next subdivision reads: “No certificate of election shall be issued until seven days after the canvassing board has declared the result of the election. In case of a contest, an election certificate shall not be issued until a court of proper jurisdiction has finally determined the contest.”
So far, no court has finally determined the contest.
This is why we have disputes, courts and nitpicky lawyers.
But Monday, Ritchie and Pawlenty, who probably don’t agree on whether the sun is up or down on most days, individually shot down the notion that they can sign a certificate while an election contest is in play as if they were both dead-eye Olympic skeet shooters.
No way, they each said.
Today, Elias (for Franken) pushed the matter to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which has already weighed in on a bunch of matters raised by the Coleman camp while this post-election process was in the recount phase. Now, it’s in the election contest phase.
On the call, Elias was asked if the Franken doesn’t run the risk of looking greedy or losing ground in the “court of public opinion” by seemingly trying to jump the gun.
Elias said no, not at all. He stuck by his assertion that the law is on his side, even if Ritchie’s and Pawlenty’s lawyers disagree.
He was asked why Franken is pushing such a controversial notion.
After all, the apparent senator-elect is 225 votes ahead, polls show him ahead in the numbers of Minnesotans who think he won and that Coleman should bow out. And, if Elias is right, Franken’s going to win the contest anyway.
Why not let the contest process play out?
Why push it with an esoteric legal claim that has allowed the Coleman side to fire broadsides about Franken “warping” the election contest process?
“We’re confident we’re going to prevail in the contest,” Elias said. “The question is: Should the people of Minnesota be deprived full representation in the United States Senate because former Senator Coleman wishes to have his day in court to try to scrounge up some more votes to try to drag this process out … He has a right to go to court. It’s one of the great things about our country. Even people without meritorious claims get to bring them in court. Now, they don’t get to win them …”
Presumably, we’ll be hearing from the Supreme Court on this matter some time soon. The justices will decide what’s meritorious.
