Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiMinnesota Supreme Court Rules for Al Franken, 5-0; Coleman Concedes
Republican Norm Coleman ended his bruising eight-month court fight over Minnesota's U.S. Senate seat this afternoon, conceding to Democrat Al Franken after the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in Franken's favor.
The justices ruled today that Franken won the U.S. Senate election and said he is entitled to an election certificate that would lead to him being seated in the Senate.
![[]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/franken0503.jpg "franken0503.jpg")
"Affirmed," wrote the Supreme Court, unanimously rejecting Coleman's claims that inconsistent practices by local elections officials and wrong decisions by a lower court had denied him victory.
Two hours after the decision was released, Coleman said he would "abide by the results."
"Furtrher litigation damages the unity of our state," he said during a news conference held at his St. Paul home. "The future today is that we have a new United States senator."
Coleman said he had called Franken to "congratulate him for his victory. I told him it's the best job he will ever have."
He added, "sure I wanted to win, both for myself and so many wonderful supporters." He said he doesn't know yet what he'll do in the future.
In its unanimous, 32-page decision, the justices wrote: "Al Franken received the highest number of votes legally cast and is entitled [under Minnesota law] to receive the certificate of election as United States Senator from the State of Minnesota."
In upholding a lower court ruling in April, the justices said Coleman had "not shown that the trial court's findings of fact are clearly erroneous or that the court committed an error of law or abused its discretion."
But the court did not grant Franken's bid to make its ruling effective immediately, leaving a window for an appeal by Coleman before Gov. Tim Pawlenty is required to issue an election certificate.
The ruling also did not directly address Pawlenty's role. The court's ruling stopped short of explicitly ordering the governor to sign the document, saying only that Franken was "entitled" to it.
In declining Franken's request to make the ruling effective immediately, the court gave Coleman 10 days to ask for a rehearing, something it rarely grants. The ruling also sidesteps Franken's request that the court direct Pawlenty and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie to sign a certificate "promptly."
The delay for a rehearing could give Coleman and better chance to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the decision and to review the case, but it was not immediately clear if he would do so.
"The bottom line is that the Court says that Franken is entitled to an election certificate, but there is no direct order to the state's governor to sign one," said Loyola Law School professor Richard Hasen, who has followed the case closely. "We'll see what the governor does, if Coleman does not concede, as he well may at this point."
In recent weeks, Pawlenty has talked about how he would not hold up an election certificate if ordered by the court to issue one.
"I'm going to do whatever the court says," Pawlenty said at a news conference a couple of weeks ago. "When the court decides that issue, as soon as I'm directed or required to sign that certificate, I will. I am not going to hold it up or delay it in any fashion."
Guy-Urel Charles, a Duke University law professor who has also tracked the case, said the court appeared to be giving deference to separation of powers in state government by not ordering Pawlenty to issue a certificate within a specific time period.
"The court isn't ordering the governor to do anything, but I think if the governor refuses, the court order him to do it," Charles said.
In upholding a lower court ruling in April, the justices said Coleman had "not shown that the trial court's findings of fact are clearly erroneous or that the court committed an error of law or abused its discretion."
The justices also said that neither the trial court nor local elections officials violated constitutional rights to equal protection, a cornerstone of Coleman's case and any possible federal appeal.
Coleman neither claims nor produced any evidence that the differing treatment of absentee ballots among jurisdictions during the election was the result of intentional or purposeful discrimination against individuals or classes.
"Coleman neither claims nor produced any evidence that the differing treatment of absentee ballots among jurisdictions during the election was the result of intentional or purposeful discrimination against individuals or classes," the court said.
It added that the trial court -- a three-judge panel -- didn't discriminate against individuals or classes when it excluded certain types of absentee ballots from being counted.
Majority Leader Harry Reid said today that Pawlenty should respect the votes of his constituents and his state's highest court.
Jim Manley, a spokesman for said the earliest Franken would be seated is next week because the Senate is out of session for the July 4 holiday.
A triumphant DFL quickly issued a news release that read, in part, "Minnesotans have shown great patience since Election Night ... We trust that Senator-elect Franken will be seated without delay."
And Democratic National Chairman Tim Kaine released a statement saying, "Senator-Elect Franken must be seated as soon as possible. The people of Minnesota rightfully elected Al Franken to serve in the Senate and there is far too much work to be done for the state and the nation to drag this process on any longer."
The state Republican Party issued a statement in which it said "today's ruling wrongly disenfranchised thousands of Minnesotans who deserve to have their votes counted. Alongside Senator Coleman, the Republican Party of Minnesota has fought to make sure every vote counts and all voters are treated fairly and uniformly."
Staff writer Bob von Sternberg and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
49 Comments so far
Show AllI would bet that Coleman was instructed by the GOP to stall Franken's seating in the Senate...he did...I wonder what Coleman received or will receive as his reward?
It will also be interesting to see what the Dems do with 60 seats in the Senate. What excuses will they come up with to continue as corporate whores?
This is terrible for Democrats, now they can't use the excuse of not having 60 votes anymore, darn it. Of course, they have no intention of advancing any sort of progressive agenda, never did never will, the number of Democrats in congress is irrelevant.
In 8 years of Bush, how many Democratic filibusters did we see to stop the genocide, illegal spying and the squandering of the treasury? Zero. A filibuster takes 40 senators. That should've been clear to a 5 yo. that Democrats are the ultimate scum, worse than Republicans who at least are honest about being criminals. But Democratic voters are repeat cretins, they'll fall for the same BS each time.
This certainly gives a boost to Glenn Beck's chances of running for office next year.
God, don't say that!!
http://mediamatters.org
/mmtv/200906300045
I guess the Republican'ts don't own the Supreme Court of Minnesota, like they do the US Supreme Court.
It's too bad that Republican'ts are such poor losers and have to use the Supreme Court to try to get their candidates appointed in opposition to the will of The People.
Can you say Al Gore?
Really? It was the Bush campaign that petitioned for the federal courts to intervene.
GW won. Gore lost. Kerry at least had the courage to lose with dignity...however the talk was the army of lawyers the Dems has in OH, PA, and FL to fight if they lost.
Too funny. Long sighted read...
A Court rule was needed over an election between a career pol and a celebrity clown. The people were so divided over the two, a judgment was needed to determine if the pol or the clown would be titled senator. Now that the decision is finally passed, the voters are left on their own to see if a clown is as (in?)effective as a career pol.
After all the great pomp and circumstance over Arlen Specter, political theatre should be very interesting this season.
And to think we progressives fume from time to time for not being taken seriously....
Great news an Al will make a great American Senator.
I don't think Al Franken is a Zionist or neocon which is the good news.
BTW -- Both candidates were Jewish and only 1% of Minnesota's population is Jewish.
Only millionaires can run for office in the US ????
"I don't think Al Franken is a Zionist "
Wrong. Totally, completely wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
Here is Al Franken at an Israel Rally:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMGlqATcwnA
He's also very much in favor of the Afghan War.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=7409607
He also initially supported Bush's war of genocide in Iraq.
Thank God, the battle appears to be over and Al is the declared winner. I'm sorry the Republican's members of Common Dreams are upset. You know it just struck me, Republicans...reading Common Dreams....Why? Your idea of a common dream is one of keeping the bottomline free market economy going at any and all costs and keeping the Republican brand alive...thats not my Common Dream.
For the same reason we watch Al Frankin...for the jokes.
I'm not upset about Franken's victory. I was just stating a fact.
Yes! Finally!
common dreams, i'm still curious about the deleted posts to this article from a couple of hours ago. certainly, the most important question is what was in the comments worthy of a ban? and if those comments are banned, how about banning some of the articles as well? frankly, many of them are more insulting than most comments. of course, that would naturally lead us to the discussion of banning comments by joehope and maxpayne and shawn berry and jennifer beddingfeld as well as everyone's favorite, nebraska nathan, all for their overachieving attempt at mediocrity.
Maybe from the post being updated three times?
Just what we need, another Israeli apologist in government.
Norm Coleman is also Jewish, and very likely held the same views on Israel.
Now Coleman concedes? Now? After the Supreme Court rules out his last ray of hope?
Some concession.
I suppose now he want to be seen as a gracious good sport, oi.
Finally.
...peace...
This is a good thing. By and large, I am a Republican with leanings toward a third party. I voted for Ron Paul in the presidential election. I hope Mr. Franken goes to Washington with six guns on his hip and steel in his eye. Represent the people, they stood by you, now stand by them.
burris is being investigated in ill. for perjury. perhaps
kucinich or russ feingold could explain to al HOW NOT to
do things in washington with other only slightly corrupt
sens. and reps. put together a voting bloc that forces
the cretins to do the right thing once in a while.
Will Al Franken's political comments on the Floor of Congress be as incisive as they were off the the Floor? Time will tell; the zionist Israeli things do not bode well.
With Senators Byrd and Kennedy ill and therefore frequently absent the Democrats will have recurrent problems getting 60 votes to cut off "debate" even after the seating of Franken.
Governor Patrick of Massachusetts is a Democrat hence there is no justification for Ted Kennedy to stay on. For the good of the Obama administration and the nation he should suppress his big ego and resign before that state might get a Republican Governor in 2010.
Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia is also a Democrat hence there is no justification for Senator Byrd to stay on. He should suppress his gigantic ego and resign before that state might get a Republican Governor in the 2009 elections.
Since I do not know the exact replacement rules both Kennedy and Byrd might be too late already. One of the great maladies of U.S. Senators is their belief that they are irreplaceable.
Minor point of correction--Snator Robert Byrd is from West Virginia and not Virginia. I don't know whether W. VA has a Democratic governor, but given that their other Senator is Jay Rockefellar, I am not sure what kind of replacement might be arranged.
Don't expect Teddy Kennedy to cease being a Senator till that terminal brain cancer he suffers from kills him. Duval Patrick could probably find a reasonably progressive replacement for him though.
Poet
WV's current Governor Manchin is a conservative big-biz-loving democrat.
Uhhh, Byrd is not a Senator from Virginia.
And whining that they need to overcome a filibuster is just another excuse to not push progressive policies. Ed Shultz has said this...force the GOP to filibuster healthcare reform if they dare, then they'll get voted out next election. They need some damn spine.
If Al Franken is actually seated in the Senate, the Democratic "Leadership" (whom quite richly deserve the quotation marks) & the Blue Dogs will have just lost their best excuse (not having enough votes to end a filibuster) as to why they have been weaseling out on progressive issues like Single Payer.
Once Franken is seated, there will be quite a lot less political cover.
Yeah, that's what some conservative media types are now saying. And strangely enough, they think it's good for Republicans, because in their twisted minds if the Senate actually does pass anything remotely progressive, the American people will revolt against it. Oy.
If the Senate does "pass anything remotely progressive," the Assimilated Press will revolt against it, by reporting on a couple of astroturf tea parties and projecting them as the "mood of the country."
Aww, hell, who am I kidding ... congress will never pass anything remotely progressive.
Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act? And yes, that's the only one I can think of. The stimulus bill was mostly a liberal/progressive thing, but many progressive economists decried it for being too small, then it was greatly weakened by making 1/3 of it tax cuts, which figures at the time showed had much less effects on spending than direct welfare did.
"I'm good enough. I'm smart enough. And gosh darn it, I like myself".
"how long before Franken sells out and begins toeing the Obimbo line?" NOTE: Apparently I am responding to a comment that has been removed (censored?) by CD.
He already has been. On every page of his blog.
http://blog.alfranken.com/2009/02/12/al-franken-obama-stimulus-plan-can-turn-crisis-into-opportunity/
And then there is his support for Israel:
"JewishJournal: A lot of Jews might agree with you on being anti-Bush on social issues, but they appreciate his stance on Israel. They perceive him as being very supportive of Israel's war against terror. Do you agree that Bush is a good friend to Israel?
Al Franken: There is definitely a pro-Israel slant, which I basically agree with for Bush. I think that he just ignored Israel for a long time immediately after being elected because he didn't want to get his hands dirty. He was basically doing everything that Clinton didn't do. If Clinton had rolled up his sleeves and worked with Barak and tried to reach a settlement there, then Bush decided that the right thing to do was to do nothing."
http://www.jewishjournal.com/home/preview.php?id=11230
(use cache if page won't load)
"Al Franken and Norm Coleman were able to just briefly put aside their legal fight over who actually won the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota, the Star Tribune reports, and come together on one issue: Showing support for Israel."
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/franken_and_coleman_publicly_come_together_on_...
"Terrorism, to me, is the use of terror for political purpose, and terror is indiscriminate murder of civilians to make a political point.
A perfect example is Hezbollah firing missiles into Israel. Is Israel bombing villages in southern Lebanon "terrorism"? I don't think it is, but I think the way they handled it was very ill-advised. I think it should have been up to the Israeli military to avoid civilian casualties as much as possible. "
http://www.forbes.com/2006/09/07/al-franken-911_cz_sd_0908franken.html
wow, mordechai, you must have stirred up the hornets' nest over at c.d. i would swear to have read your post here along with several other comments that no longer show up. c.d., what gives?
my comments were deleted as well, I guess we must have offended someone
Musn't lean on the Democrats too hard.
thank you, god.
not that it really matters, but what "useful information" have you got to offer, djb?
Norm Coleman just conceded.
I believe it was the indispensible Russell Mokhiber who recently described the progression:
1) freshman pol arrives in DC and finds it a cesspool of corruption;
2) some time passes;
3) cesspool morphs into cozy hot tub.
Be an exception, Al.
Either way, whether Coleman or Franken, they'll have another clown in the Senate. But given the current makeup of the Senate - no one will notice.
Given how the democrats in Congress have let the republicans push them around, Franken's presence won't make a bit of difference. Can we really expect 59 asswipes to be more effective than 58?
Even if Franken turns out to be solidly Progressive, he would still be one of a small minority on the hill.
The only pleasure that I can take from this is to see that political ghoul Coleman kicked out on his slimy ass.
With what Obama and the democratic leadership have turned out to be, I'll take any little ray of sunshine that I can.
q
quickstepper: "democrats in Congress have let the republicans push them around"
That is only the good cop, bad cop routine. Most democrats go right along with the conservative program, they are not pushed around. It is just a cheap PR act, can't you see through that?
I think that you're oversimplifying the matter. While there are no doubt many dems who fit your description, I firmly believe that most of them would prefer to pursue different policies but are too timid to buck their leadership or what is perceived to be a popular president.
For example, just a few days ago, a majority of the House dems disagreed with the White House and voted to support the McGovern amendment to the House Authorization Bill. Obama and Pelosi are having to pull out all of the stops to force most dems to follow their lead on this and other issues.
You need to remember that many of these Congressmen won their seats in the last two elections and are relatively inexperienced. Quite a few of them represent conservative districts that could easily slip back into the republican column. While you and I may see little difference to be expected from such a development, they have a different point of view.
So no, I don't agree that being in Congress is "just a cheap PR act" for a lot of dems. They're just scared and their leadership is not helping them.
q
There's some serious irony in your reasoning, you know? that Obama is having to pull out all the stops to meet his agenda., ...seems he was the one who was voted in as the change agent. So, the idea would be, if in fact there was anytime these 'timid' agents of change were ever going to act, it would be with a leader like Barack Obama. Too weird, because he's so very found of arguing people have to push him to make the change we can believe. that is to say, if he didn't feel he had support, he wouldn't act as progressively as he led so many to believe.... or perhaps, he is being pushed and the US isn't as progressive as those timid politicians you reference.
seriously ironic stuff playing in those tea leaves.
I say give Franken a chance and let him in the Senate already. There's no reason for the holdup. What he'll be once he's senator is another matter and we will see but it's time to allow him in. When the tainted Burris could get in, I fail to see how Franken deserves to be held back.