Posted: February 3, 2009
Court Denies Coleman's Motion for Summary Judgment
The "tripartisan" 3-judge court, in denying Coleman's motion for summary judgment, unanimously ruled that there are disputed factual issues that must go to trial, saying Coleman will be permitted to present evidence that up to 4800 absentee ballots were wrongly rejected under state law. But the court speaks dismissively of Coleman's Bush v. Gore claim: "Unlike the situation presented in Florida in Bush v. Gore, the Minnesota Legislature has enacted a standard clearly and unambiguously enumerating the grounds upon which an absentee ballot may be accepted or rejected. . . . The objective standards imposed on absentee ballots by Minn. Stat. 203B.12 distinguishes the election systems of Minnesota and Florida." This language needs to be considered in relationship of the Court's earlier ruling today that precluded any consideration of Coleman's claims regarding roughly 7000 additional absentee ballots. (All publicly available documents in the case are collected here).