Coleman Rests Case, Ending More Than Five Weeks At Bat
The Coleman team was scheduled to rest their case today, and they did indeed do it -- not quite, though. In fact, they've provisionally rested, pending court action on a whole bunch of motions they just made.
First of all, Coleman lawyer James Langdon announced that they're filing a motion for the court to declare that "Rule 9," the procedure during the recount for handling duplicates of damaged absentee ballots, was illegal.
Both campaigns had called for this rule to be created during the recount, and they'd agreed to its conditions even with the risks that it could result in votes being counted twice -- or in other cases, not counted at all -- in precincts where some ballots weren't fully labeled through human error. And of course, it's really impossible to know just how much or how little this actually happened, or how the individual votes broke.
Coleman has contended that Al Franken illegitimately gained over 100 votes because of this process. But his campaign's prior role in creating Rule 9 means they are potentially stuck under the doctrine of invited error -- that is, you can't reverse your position just because it hasn't worked out well for you.
As such, they need the rule to be declared wholly illegal -- that its consequences are an affront to the voters, not just Coleman -- in an attempt to absolve themselves from their commitment. The Coleman camp made a prior motion to nullify an agreement on the grounds that it wasn't legal in the first place -- and the court ruled against them. So if the court again rules that they made a legal deal and they're stuck with it, this will be another issue for appeals.
Also, Langdon is filing a motion asking the court reconsider a previous ruling against Coleman, who wanted them to order the inspection of ballots from around the state. Here's the thing: That ruling was in January, as the trial was just beginning. This isn't exactly the most timely appeal.
So the Coleman camp has come down with a bunch of big legal arguments, and done them at the last minute. Does this mean they aren't actually resting? Not really. What they're doing here is laying down a basis for appeal, after the judges eventually give an expected ruling that Al Franken is the winner of this photo-finish.
Josh
Elana
Matt
Eric
First up, a motion for directed verdict. Has Coleman met his burden to show that he, and not Franken, got the most votes? I don't think so.
Of course, it will be denied because this Court just wants to air it all out and then rule.
March 2, 2009 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would expect Franken to make a motion the certain specific claims from Coleman should be dismissed for lack of evidence, such as his duplicate counting claim, his claims regarding the lost envelope of ballots, his equal protection claims, etc (I would have to re-read Coleman's "Notice of Contest" to see what else Franken might move to dismiss). If any of those claims are dismissed, Franken will not cover them further with his witnesses.
I would not however expect a motion for a directed verdict, and even if one is made, it will be denied. There are already approximately 1000 more ballots that will be counted (included in the 1000 is a rough estimate of the number of ballots that will eventually be counted from the absentee ballots currently being opened to look for registration forms in the secrecy envelopes.) This is more than enough ballots to overturn the result.
I would expect Franken to proceed with his case, entering into evidence ballots that he wants counted, and when Franken is done, the Court will go over the evidence, determine which ballots presented by the parties should be counted, order them counted, and then issue a final judgment declaring which candidate received the most lawfully cast votes. This will take about 2-3 weeks.
March 2, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Five weeks! And the defense?
March 2, 2009 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Every time I try to follow this story, I think, Eric must have the mother of all spreadsheets to keep track of all this.
But then, that's how the GOP always operates. Keep things so complicated and downright stupid that the dazed populace can no longer remember which lie was which. Props to Eric for mastering all this for us.
March 2, 2009 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
naw .. Spreadsheets are so flat. He's gotta be using a 3-dimensional relational database in order to be getting all that depth.
March 2, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's my predictions, for what they're worth, which is not much . . .
1) Franken will ask for directed verdicts and/or reconsideration of certain issues / categories of ballots that the court can now determine either as a matter of law or because Coleman did not meet his burden of proof - and Franken will win on some of those.
2) Franken will present evidence and testimony on issues not resolved, but he will present them in a very concise, organized and prepared manner, that will take him much less time. His arguments will result in the consideration of some additional ballots, and a net gain to Franken. The actual gain will not be large, but could be mathematically significant. Mathematical significance may be relevant down the road, to counter Coleman's novel and legally-unsupported argument that the entire election is tainted.
3) Franken will be named well before the end of the month.
4) Coleman will appeal, solely for the purpose of delay, and the appeal(s) will be fast-tracked.
5) The US S.Ct will deny cert. because they don't want to be involved, and they have nothing to gain by accepting the case.
6) Franken will be seated by the end of June, either provisionally or finally.
7) Coleman will be indicted on improper funding charges.
March 2, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can we get that done up as a storyboard for the miniseries, ASAP?
March 2, 2009 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Number Seven would end the gooper spin quickly. I'd like it to happen now, but know it wont. Good comment.
March 3, 2009 6:37 AM | Reply | Permalink