OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Information & Analysis

Minnesota recounts: differences between 1962 and 2008

The Star Tribune has a column analyzing some of the differences between the 1962 gubernatorial race recount and today’s Senate race recount and contest. Here are some of the differences:

  • The law back then did not provide for the automatically triggered administrative recount that Minnesota has today. That provision was not enacted until after the chaotic presidential recount in Florida in 2000.
  • There were 97,000 challenges in the ’62 race contrasted with only about 6,600 in the '08 Senate race.
  • Incumbent Andersen stayed in office while the election contest was litigated resulting in his eventual defeat by challenger Rolvaag.
  • One of Coleman’s strategies is to seek the inclusion of selected absentee ballots that have thus far been rejected by election officials or the Franken campaign. Rolvaag sought to exclude more absentee ballots in his contest. The contest court in '63, however, upheld the decisions of local officials on the inclusion and rejection of absentee ballots.
  • The columnist emphasizes that Coleman likely faces more national pressure to continue fighting than did Andersen in 1963. She cites EL@M Director Edward Foley’s position that neither candidate should appeal the decision of the contest court if it viewed as a neutral body and is unanimous in its opinion.

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

Of Bouncing Balls and a Big Blue Shift

Edward B. Foley

It is a fortuitous coincidence that the University of Virginia’s Journal of Law & Politics has just published a piece of mine that shows the relevance of the current vote-counting process in Virginia’s Attorney General election to what might happen if the 2016 presidential election turns on a similar vote-counting process in Virginia. 

Read full post here.

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

Ohio treasurer receives OK to host town halls

Professor Daniel Tokaji was quoted in an article from the Associated Press about an attorney general opinion that allows the Ohio treasurer to conduct telephone town halls using public money. The opinion will likely have broad ramifications for the upcoming elections, Tokaji said.

“As a practical matter, while that legal advice is certainly right, very serious concerns can arise about whether these are really intended to inform Ohio constituents about the operations of his office or if they’re campaign events,” he said.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Daniel P. Tokaji

Tokaji Testimony for Senate DISCLOSE Hearing

Professor Tokaji has submitted the following writing testimony for today's hearing before the U.S. Senate Rules and Administration Committee on the proposed DISCLOSE Act.

 

more info & analysis...