In an order issued late on Thursday afternoon, December 18, the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered that improperly rejected absentee ballots should be counted and the results included in the recount now underway. In doing so, the Court rejected Norm Coleman’s petition to restrict or delay counting of absentee ballots, and admonished both campaigns that they should not file motions “for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation.”
Selected quotes from the opinion: (full opinion attached in PDF format)
“Because previously rejected absentee ballots that all agree were rejected improperly should be counted and in light of the fact that the State Canvassing Board has not yet certified the final results of the recount, we order candidates Norm Coleman and Al Franken and their campaign representatives, the Secretary of State, and all county auditors and canvassing boards to establish and implement a process, as expeditiously as practicable, for the purpose of identifying all absentee ballot envelopes that the local election officials and the candidates agree were rejected in error. … Any absentee ballot envelopes so identified that the local election officials and the candidates agree were rejected in error shall be opened, the ballot shall be counted, and its vote for United States Senator added to the total votes cast for that office in that precinct.”
Justice Alan Paige dissented from the majority opinion, writing in part:
“The court’s ruling denies county canvassing boards which have reached the decision–that an absentee ballot was rejected in obvious error–the ability to correct those errors unless the candidates agree. The court’s order may seek the peaceful way out by asking the campaigns to agree on improperly rejected ballots. But the order does not guarantee that the candidates and their political parties will agree on any rejected ballot. Instead, the court’s order will arbitrarily disqualify enfranchised voters on the whim of the candidates and political parties …”
Concurring in part and dissenting in part from the majority opinion, Justice Paul Anderson criticized the court for narrowing the scope of county canvassing boards’ review of rejected absentee ballots, but expressed confidence in the ultimate result:
“Winston Churchill is reputed to have once said, in an admiring tone, that Americans ultimately do the right thing after they have exhausted all the other alternatives. Sometimes, the wheels of justice and due process take time to fully turn. While I believe that we have incorrectly exhausted one alternative today, I have complete confidence that ultimately the right thing will be done and all validly cast absentee ballots will be properly counted.”
Comment