The Minnesota Supreme Court on Friday refused Al Franken's request to be immediately certified as winner of the U.S. Senate election, saying that step must await a final resolution of the long-running recount trial and possible appeals.
But even as the high court issued its ruling, Franken's lawyers received a sympathetic hearing in their attempt to throw out Republican Norm Coleman's legal challenge of Franken's 225-vote recount margin.
In a 5-0 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that DFLer Franken was not entitled to be certified as the election winner until the legal contest has made its way through the state courts. The justices said state law blocks an election certificate from being issued until then.
The court also said federal law does not require states to certify senators by the time a new term begins in January. Moreover, they said, the Senate can seat Franken without a certification anyway.
Even as the opinion was being released, Franken attorney Marc Elias was telling the judges hearing the recount trial in St. Paul that Coleman had failed to prove that enough absentee ballots had been wrongly rejected for him to win. "Whether it is nine, whether it is 19, whether it is 99, it is far fewer than 225," Elias said.
But it was Coleman attorney James Langdon whom the three judges peppered with questions, asking him why thousands more ballots should be counted when they were already examined several times before the trial began.
Langdon replied: Because different eyes used different standards in determining whether like ballots should be counted. Not only that, he said, but the length of time it has taken to update the state's voter registration database has left his side without the voter information it needs to determine whether those ballots should be counted.
Langdon said that the Coleman side had shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, that thousands of Minnesota absentee ballot voters had been disenfranchised.