MN-Sen: Cornyn's Tipoff

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 06:28:11 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

I think Sen. John Cornyn's (R-TX) statement on the Minnesota Senate election contest let's you know where the end of the line comes for Coleman:

Events today do not address the main issue that remains unresolved: over 4,000 Minnesotans were disenfranchised by this three-judge panel. That's why it's so critical for this process to move forward before the Minnesota Supreme Court and why Senate Republicans fully support Senator Coleman's efforts. "The message from our side has remained consistent throughout this process: we want this election to resolve itself as quickly, but not at the expense of Minnesota's laws or voters. . . . Senate Democrats should stand down, set partisan politics aside, and respect Minnesota's laws and voters."

(Emphasis supplied.) No "equal protection" talk. Only a passing reference to "enfranchising the voters." The Minnesota Supreme Court is the end of the line for Coleman.

Speaking for me only

< A Close Eye | Yves Smith on Credit Risk Study >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

MN-Sen: Cornyn's Tipoff | 10 comments (10 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Ah, dialed back from "WWIII" talk (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Cream City on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 06:34:05 PM EST

so the national Repubs see the writing on the wall -- and/or got s message of another sort from the Minnesota Repubs to back off. Nothing would get backs up in Minnesota more than a Texan telling them what to do, or what would be done to them, as Conryn did before. The fool.

Really? (none / 0) (#2)
by inclusiveheart on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 06:47:08 PM EST

Funny because I read that as the building block for Cornyn to talk about "disenfranchised" voters not registered in Minnesota having their voices heard after the MN State Supreme Court rules against Coleman. Laying the ground work for the federal court challenge. And I am only half kidding.

aw, I hate it when they get smart.,, (none / 0) (#3)
by connecticut yankee on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 06:52:09 PM EST

This was going to be a free hammer to beat the national GOP with.

Cornyn is not smart enough to be that subtle (none / 0) (#4)
by magster on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 07:18:23 PM EST

I expect Coleman to push this as far as he can.

: Can't push it past the MN SC (none / 0) (#5)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 07:20:17 PM EST

If Cornyn does not state he will block Franken from being seated.
And if Cornyn won't fight till the last dog dies, then Pawlenty is off the hook.

If Harry Reid said this, I would agree (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 08:21:22 PM EST

But I think the Republicans may decide that it's beneficial to go all the way to the Supremes. What they said "yesterday" won't matter.

i expect (none / 0) (#7)
by cpinva on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 10:00:38 PM EST

this will end up in the USSC. if coleman loses there (and i'm not betting the rent money on that), the republicans will threaten something else.

limbaugh, hannity, coulter, beck, et al will be screaming to the heavens that franken and the dems "stole" the election. and how this is sooooooooooooooo much different than 2000.

because, well, just because!

: Dunno, but Minnesota will change (none / 0) (#8)
by Cream City on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 10:11:04 PM EST

some of its processes, upsetting as it is (per the papers there) for that state proudful of its clean elections to see now that 10 percent of ballots that were rejected in the state were wrongly rejected. It reminds us all that the handling of ballots down at the ward and precinct levels is key, like the crew down the street from me tonight doing the tallies. They are all retirees in their 60s and 70s, and they put in a 13-hour day before the polls closed and the count could even begin. I don't know how they do it, bless 'em -- but is this the best way to do it?

How Would a Move to Federal Court Work? (none / 0) (#9)
by Jackstraw on Tue Apr 07, 2009 at 11:26:02 PM EST

As a practical matter, how does the case move to Federal Court after the Minnesota SC affirms lower court decisions that Coleman doesn't like?

Does it go to a Federal trials (?) court, then a Federal Appeals court, and then finally the USSC?

Cornyn doesn't get near enough press (none / 0) (#10)
by Jake Left on Wed Apr 08, 2009 at 09:46:03 PM EST

for being the truly dreadful person he is.

Other conservative asses get al the headlines. Cornyn works tirelessly for big oil, big insurance, big pharma and every other source of greed and excess. He is a rubber stamp with funny hair and as humorless a man as ever walked, but he just doesn't seem to make the headlines. He's Phil Graham without the pretend brains.