Quick Links
Recent Litigation Documents
- Opinion (6/30)
Coleman v. Franken (Case Page) - Order Granting Motion for Enforcement of Stipulation (6/26)
Common Cause v. Coffman (Case Page) - Order of Dismissal (6/25)
ACORN v. Scott (Case Page) - Settlement Agreement (6/25)
ACORN v. Scott (Case Page) - Opinion (6/22)
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Gonzales (Case Page) - Motion to Stay Granted (6/22)
Morales v. Handel (Case Page) - Reply Brief (6/22)
Texas Democratic Party v. Bettencourt (Case Page) - Order Granting Motion to Strike (6/16)
Common Cause v. Coffman (Case Page) - Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss (6/12)
Janis v. Nelson (Case Page) - Motion to Dismiss (6/12)
Janis v. Nelson (Case Page)
—— Media Hotline (614) 247-8880 ——
News Wire 
The latest election law developments from across the country...last updated July 1 (4:01 PM).
- National - Rise and Flaw of Internet's Election-Fraud Hunters
- Minnesota - Minnesota Supreme Court Decides in Favor of Al Franken
- Minnesota - Minn. court rules for Franken in Senate fight
- New Jersey - Corzine OKs vote-by-mail legislation
- Florida - Watchdog group praises Florida's election practices
- See More Headlines
Information and Analysis
MN Supreme Court Rules in Coleman v. Franken
June 30 (2:20 PM)
The Minnesota Supreme Court has issued an opinion (6/30) affirming the decision of the trial court that Al Franken received the highest number of votes legally cast and is entitled to receive the certificate of election as U.S. Senator from the state of Minnesota [See EL@M case page for additional information].
Supreme Court Issues Opinion in Northwest Austin Case
June 23 (8:59 AM)
On Monday (6/22), the Supreme Court issued an opinion in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Gonzales, reversing and remanding the case to the District Court [See EL@M case page for additional information].
DOJ Issues a Finding on Georgia Program
June 3 (10:26 AM)
On Monday (6/1), the Department of Justice rejected Georgia's voter verification program, which included the use of Social Security numbers and driver's license data to determine citizenship (See the AP story from the Atlanta Journal Constitution for more details). The Georgia Secretary of State has also issued a press release commenting on the decision.
New Lawsuit in Minnesota
May 29 (12:39 PM)
Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie is being sued over the voter registration records in the state. The petitioners in the suit, the group Minnesota Majority, several Republican legislators and others are alleging voting discrepancies in the 2008 election. The petition, filed with the Minnesota Supreme Court on Thursday (5/28), claims that updates to Minnesota's registration system are insufficient and that the 2008 vote totals exceed voters in the system by 406,000. [See EL@M case page for additional information].
Coleman Files Reply Brief
May 15 (3:21 PM)
The Appellants have now filed the Reply Brief (5/15) with the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Franken Files Brief in Recount Case
May 12 (12:00 AM)
Respondent Al Franken filed his brief yesterday (5/11) with the Minnesota Supreme Court [See EL@M case page for additional documents].
Coleman Files Brief in Minnesota Recount Case
April 30 (4:22 PM)
The first brief has been filed today (4/30) by the appellants with the Minnesota Supreme Court.
More Headlines
- Tedisco Concedes in NY 20 - April 27 (10:47 AM)
- Minnesota Recount - Order Setting Date for Arguments - April 24 (10:57 AM)
- Appeal Filed in Minnesota Recount - April 21 (12:00 AM)
- NY-20 update - Tedisco challenges Gillibrand's ballot - April 16 (9:47 AM)
- NY-20 congressional race - vote-counting continues as do court battles - April 14 (3:26 PM)
- Minnesota contest - possible next steps - April 14 (3:06 PM)
- 3-Judge Court Issues Final Ruling for Franken - April 13 (8:20 PM)
- NY-20 congressional race: absentee ballots to be counted tomorrow - April 7 (4:14 PM)
- MN: Additional Absentees Extend Franken's Lead - April 7 (1:16 PM)
- Vote-counting today in Minnesota contest courtroom - April 7 (10:54 AM)
- NY-20 congressional race tied for now - April 6 (2:05 PM)
- Minnesota U.S. Senate contest - Summarizing video - April 6 (12:34 PM)
- Minnesota Senate race - analyses and comments - April 1 (11:17 AM)
- New York special congressional election candidates separated by 65 votes - April 1 (10:56 AM)
- New orders in the Minnesota U.S. Senate contest - March 31 (5:46 PM)
- No news yet in the Minnesota Senate contest - March 20 (11:51 AM)
- Final arguments concluded in the Minnesota U.S. Senate contest - March 13 (1:31 PM)
- Minnesota Senate contest - Franken to provisionally rest case tomorrow - March 11 (5:22 PM)
- What will happen to the 89 ballots whose envelopes contained valid registration forms? - March 9 (5:35 PM)
- Minnesota Senate contest - 80 registration forms found out of 1500 secrecy envelopes - March 9 (12:58 PM)
- Minnesota contest court hears arguments over Franken's motion to dismiss - March 6 (6:47 PM)
- Minnesota Senate contest - Two Minn. Sup. Ct. decisions, Coleman's response to motion to dismiss, contest court motions hearing - March 6 (3:52 PM)
- Minnesota Senate contest update - March 5 (6:12 PM)
Archives
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004
Interactive Election Law Maps
 |
 |
Opinion
Impressive Unanimity: the Historical Significance of Coleman v. Franken
June 30 (Edward B. Foley)The Minnesota Supreme Court's decision in the Franken-Coleman case will begin its life as one of the most legally significant resolutions of a disputed election in U.S. history. [Read Comment]
Recent Opinion Articles
- Impressive Unanimity: the Historical Significance of Coleman v. Franken
Edward B. Foley, June 30 - Conscientious Judging on Display
Edward B. Foley, June 1 - Factual Points and Uncertainties Relevant to the Coleman v. Franken Appeal
Edward B. Foley, May 14
|
Election Law @ Moritz | Professor Edward B. Foley, Director | electionlaw@osu.edu
Please note: Election Law @ Moritz is nonpartisan and does not endorse, support, or oppose any candidate, campaign, or party. Opinions expressed by individuals associated with Election Law @ Moritz, either on this web site or in connection with conferences or other activities undertaken by the program, represent solely the views of the individuals offering the opinions and not the program itself. Election Law @ Moritz institutionally does not represent any clients or participate in any litigation, but individuals affiliated with the program may from time to time in their own personal capacity engage in pro bono representation of clients other than partisan candidates or organizations.
The Ohio State University | Michael E. Moritz College of Law | 55 West 12th Avenue | Columbus, OH 43210-1391 | (614) 292-2631
If you have trouble accessing this page or need to request an alternate format, please email the Moritz Law Webmaster
PDF files in this site may require Adobe Reader to view (link opens in new window)