Posted: January 13, 2009
Franken campaign files motion to dismiss contest
See the motion here and the supporting memorandum here. The campaign claims that the Minnesota contest court is very limited in its jurisdiction over the contest and which questions it may resolve in such contests. It also emphasizes that the U.S. Senate is the sole judge of the election of its members. The memo says that Minnesota law (209.12) confers narrow authority on the contest court to decide how many votes were cast for each candidate in a congressional election while the rest of the chapter on election contests confers broader authority on courts to make factual findings and legal conclusions about election irregularities in other types of contests. In the case of elections for U.S. Senate, the Franken campaign argues that a contest court may only take and preserve evidence of irregularities but may not make findings and conclusions. The Franken memo also argues that no amendment can be made to the notice of contest so that it will satisfy the requirement of specifying the grounds for the contest because the time for filing a satisfactory notice has expired. It also argues that even if the court had jurisdiction over the matter, the Coleman campaign has not stated claims for which relief may be granted. See the Pioneer Press coverage here. More analysis of the arguments of both sides and the law governing this contest will be posted here this week.