Editorials
Our View: Election review shouldn't go to federal courts
To say Minnesotans are weary of the ongoing court review of the Al Franken and Norm Coleman election count would be an understatement.
The unresolved election seems to have dragged on longer than the brutally long winter.
After eight weeks of litigation, Franken has not only held his narrow lead but extended it to 312 after a special three-judge panel last week examined 351 previously unopened ballot envelopes.
The court on Monday issued its ruling — that Franken drew the most votes — but Coleman’s lawyers had already indicated they will appeal the decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
With virtually all legal arguments and the vote total going in Franken’s favor throughout the review process, many Minnesotans are saying Coleman should accept the inevitable now and not appeal to the state’s high court.
But it is important that the state court system be allowed to fully review the legal questions in the case.
Coleman’s lawyers, who want as many as 4,800 more rejected absentee ballots reviewed, make serious allegations about the legitimacy of the state’s election system. They argue the three-judge panel isn’t seriously looking at flaws in the system that makes it impossible to determine a winner in very close races.
Whether or not that is true should be of great interest to all Minnesotans and it is a question that the state Supreme Court should review.
If, however, the high court either allows the three-judge panel’s ruling to stand, or takes the case for review and ultimately rules against Coleman, Franken should be seated in the U.S. Senate.
There are already indications that Coleman would push the case into the federal courts if he loses before the state’s high court. That would benefit the Republican Party by keeping Democrat Franken out of the Senate for many more months.
The issues being raised by Coleman may be important, but Minnesotans should feel confident the state’s judicial system, including the Minnesota Supreme Court, is fully capable of deciding state election issues.
Dragging a losing case into the federal court system would smack more of political tricks than a sincere attempt to clarify state election law.
- Editorials
-
-
Our View: Health care a challenge for GOP
The Issue
President Obama has invited Republican leaders to meet with him on health care.
-
Our View: Leave old education law behind
The Issue
No Child Left Behind will likely be revamped this year if the Obama administration has its way. -
Our View: Civic center expansion worth the investment
Mankato leaders have requested state bonding to expand and improve the Verizon Wireless Center.
-
Our View: Caucus-goers key element of democracy
Thumbs up: To everyone who attended caucuses on Tuesday.
-
Our View: Health care costs keep rising
The Issue: The federal government’s share of the total health care bill continues to expand.
-
Our View: Mammoth jobs await Legislature
The Issue: State budget deficit, election reform, mental health -
Our View: Honesty required in state budget debate
Minnesotans shopping for a new governor ready to make sufficient changes to fix the state’s gigantic budget shortfall are going to be disappointed.
-
Our View: State needs to rethink higher ed
Higher education expects funding cuts at the coming legislative session.
-
Our View: Caucuses are political party time
The Issue: Minnesota's precinct caucuses are Tuesday night.
-
Our View: Technology can widen democracy
The Issue: Voters feel left out of the debate, decisions and without influence
- More Editorials Headlines
-
