“I proudly stand in support of Senator Norm Coleman’s pursuit to see that Minnesota’s voters are enfranchised by having their ballots counted. If voters do not have confidence in elections, then they will not have confidence in their elected leaders. That is why the judges’ review of thousands of additional ballots in Minnesota is critical to the democratic process. The Republican National Committee remains committed to Norm Coleman’s campaign and confident that when the recount contest is complete, he will be re-elected to the U.S. Senate.”

Meanwhile, Franken’s lawyers are arguing before the Minnesota Supreme Court today that Franken should be issued a temporary election certificate so that Minnesota can have its full representation in the Senate while Coleman’s election contest is resolved (it could take a while). Watch the hearing live:

A Coleman spokesman insists that the move is purely financial and reflects no sense of pessimism about the race.

“The senator needs to earn a living while the contest is going on,” said Mark Drake, adding, “I think our supporters recognize that Sen. Coleman is not a millionaire.”

Meanwhile, Coleman’s opponent, DFLer Al Franken, is getting ready for work at the Capitol. According to our sister site, The Minnesota Independent, Franken discussed Senate business and potential committee appointments with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and Reid has indicated that he would like to seat Franken as soon as possible.

But in all likelihood, they’ll have to wait for a ruling from a specially appointed three-judge panel, which will begin hearing Coleman’s election contest on Monday.

The Minnesota canvassing board doesn’t certify a winner; it simply certifies a count. Here we are in the contest phase. In legal terminology, it’s a de novo trial – totally new. It’s not an appeal of the canvassing board’s decision. …

Coleman will try to establish that the ballots have not been counted uniformly, and the different methods led to an inaccurate count. There is evidence for this. …

Coleman might also narrow the margins if the contest board absorbs his arguments about double counting.

I don’t buy it. Sure, anything’s possible at this point, but you have to remember that the courts don’t operate in a vacuum. As much as they should be following the letter of the law, they’re also well aware that the people of Minnesota are thoroughly fed up with this election and want their full dual representation in the U.S. Senate.

According to a recent poll, 49 percent of Minnesotans disagree with Coleman’s plan to challenge the election results, and 44 percent say he should concede even before the justices rule on the case. Among independents in another poll, a majority oppose Coleman’s decision and want Franken to be seated provisionally.

And who are the justices making this decision? They’re a three-judge tribunal appointed by NFL Hall of Famer Alan Page, who is believed to be a Democrat. While his selected judges technically cover the political spectrum — they were appointed by a DFLer (Rudy Perpich), an independent (Jesse Ventura) and a Republican (Arne Carlson), respectively — Carlson has already stated publicly that Coleman should concede. If these judges lean in any direction, it’s likely to be Franken’s.

Then we come to the crux of the matter: the nature of Coleman’s challenges. Quite simply, there’s no consistency to them. Coleman’s cherry-picking lawyers are asking to add some ballots and remove others, without any overarching logic (or much success). The judges will recognize that Franken can play that game too, and unless they want to open up a whole new set of challenges, it seems to me that they’re likely to uphold the canvassing board’s result — and the state Supreme Court’s prior rulings — and send Franken to Washington.

UPDATE: Nate Silver also has some thoughts on this. Worth a read.

Yesterday, Franken sought Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s (D) signature of the election certificate, but they declined, citing a statute requiring any court contest of the election result to be resolved before the certificate can be signed. Franken’s opponent, former GOP Sen. Norm Coleman, is contesting the election in a lawsuit.

But now Franken’s lawyers are arguing that one subdivision of the statute overrides another, and as a result the state is compelled to certify Franken’s victory, even if Coleman’s suit is not yet resolved.

Here’s an excerpt of the subdivision cited by Franken’s lawyers:

In an election for United States senator, the governor shall prepare an original certificate of election, countersigned by the secretary of state, and deliver it to the secretary of the United States Senate. … If a recount is undertaken by a canvassing board pursuant to section 204C.35, no certificate of election shall be prepared or delivered until after the recount is completed. In case of a contest, the court may invalidate and revoke the certificate as provided in chapter 209.

And here’s the subdivision cited by Pawlenty:

No certificate of election shall be issued until seven days after the canvassing board has declared the result of the election. In case of a contest, an election certificate shall not be issued until a court of proper jurisdiction has finally determined the contest. This subdivision shall not apply to candidates elected to the office of state senator or representative.

The two appear to contradict each other, and now it’s up to the state Supreme Court to resolve.

(Via The Minnesota Independent.)

At the end of the statewide recount, Franken led by 225 votes, and today he sent letters to Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie (D), arguing that Minnesota should have full representation in the Senate as the upper chamber begins to debate its agenda. The state leaders have yet to respond.

According to state law, the election certificate cannot be signed within seven days of the certification of the result. That seven-day window has now elapsed, but it is unclear whether Franken can be seated in Washington while Coleman’s lawsuit is pending.

In the meantime, Coleman’s case has taken a serious hit. He is seeking to have 654 rejected absentee ballots counted, even though they have twice been ruled faulty — on Election Day, and upon a second review by election officials last month. Now it looks as if they will be rejected for the third time.

Several counties have once again reviewed these ballots, and the numbers aren’t good for Coleman. Nate Silver reports that of the 151 of these ballots that the counties have reevaluated, just one has been deemed improperly rejected. For Coleman, that’s a success rate of two-thirds of one percent.

Of course, Coleman’s aim is to have the courts rule in his favor, and local officials will probably not play much of a role. But at a time when Coleman needs literally everything to go his way if he is to have a chance of overturning Franken’s victory, this isn’t a good start.

UPDATE 2:08 PM: The Minnesota Independent reports that Pawlenty has rejected Franken’s request for a signed election certificate, citing a statute indicating that election contests must be resolved before a certificate can be issued.

Basically, Republican Norm Coleman is contesting DFLer Al Franken’s election victory on three fronts. First, he says that 133 lost ballots that benefited Franken by 46 net votes should not be counted. Second, he alleges that between 130 and 150 ballots were counted twice, though he can’t be sure which candidate they helped. And third, he argues that 654 additional absentee ballots should be counted, even though they were twice rejected by election officials.

The election contest will be adjudicated by a three-judge panel to be named by NFL Hall of Famer and current Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page, who is believed to be a Democrat. Republicans will no doubt whine about a liberal bias in the courts — as they already have in this contest — but Page is the ranking member of the state’s high court, after Chief Justice Eric Magnuson recused himself.

Basically, this is all a “Hail Mary” on the part of the Coleman campaign, which would have to have everything go its way to stand a chance of erasing Franken’s 225-vote lead.

When will it finally end? From The Minnesota Independent:

Nobody knows. Most political observers have speculated about a roughly two-month timeframe. But legal expert Ron Rosenbaum, speaking on KFAN (1130-AM) yesterday, poured cold water on that relatively quick scenario. “I think those people are dreaming,” he told host Dan Barreiro. “This thing could easily last longer than you even want to imagine, if permitted, and I think there’s a reasonable chance that could happen.”

There was no noticeable partisan division among the board. I reject any imputation of misconduct to the board such as is implicit in the Journal editorial. Whatever inconsistencies the board committed in ruling on challenged ballots and other issues do not result from partisan mischief.

This isn’t to say that Johnson thinks Al Franken’s win was legitimate: He attacks Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie for “collusion” with Franken and recommends that incumbent former Sen. Norm Coleman (R) hire a “new quarterback” who is tougher than his current team (which includes President George. W. Bush’s 2000 Florida recount lawyer Ben Ginsburg) to fight back.

But if the Journal is wrong about “partisan misconduct,” that takes oomph out of the argument that the Minnesota Supreme Court needs to intervene for a new recount. The idea that Minnesota Democrats stole the election is what Coleman and the conservative media are trying to push here, not the idea that the canvassing board made a few decisions that broke Franken’s way.

The problem is, back on Nov. 5, when Coleman held a tentative 215-vote lead, he said that if he were Franken, he would “step back” because “the healing process is so important, the possibility of making a change of this magnitude in the voting system we have is so remote.” Take a look:

Now, with Franken up by a nearly identical margin — 225 votes — and Coleman’s chances infinitely more remote than Franken’s were in November, Coleman seems to have reversed his stance.

We’ll know for sure in a little more than an hour. At 4 p.m. ET, he is scheduled to hold a press conference. As much as Democrats — and some Republicans — are hoping for a surprise concession of defeat, it’s widely expected that he’ll announce his plans to sue. You can watch it live at The Uptake.

We’ll have an update after the press conference.

UPDATE 4:10 p.m. ET: As expected, Coleman’s not giving in. “As of today not every valid vote has been counted and some have been counted twice,” he asserted at the press conference. Again contradicting his Nov. 5 self, he said, “I think it’s really important for a six-year term that we get this right,” adding later, “Let’s take the time … to get it right.”

However, Coleman is blocking the inclusion of about a third of the absentee ballots from Franken-friendly areas, such as St. Louis County. So far, Franken’s been taking the high ground and pushing for all 1,346 ballots in question to be counted — but if the Coleman campaign keeps cherry-picking ballots, Franken might have to change his strategy.

Sixty percent of these rejected absentee ballots come from five counties whose voters have favored Franken 57 percent of the time. If all of the ballots from these counties are included, Franken stands to gain 112 net votes. But if Coleman blocks a third of them, Franken will net just 75 votes, bringing his lead to 121.

Then we come to the remaining 40 percent of the ballots, in counties where Coleman holds an approximate 56-44 advantage. If the ballots hew to the Nov. 4 trends, Coleman can expect to pick up 60 votes. That would cut Franken’s lead to 61 votes — probably a bit too close for comfort for the Franken team, especially when Coleman’s lawyers have all sorts of challenges planned. And if Coleman gets 61 percent of the votes in these counties, the race will be a virtual tie.

Mind you, these back-of-the-envelope (or, more accurately, front-of-the-vastly-overdue-electric-bill) calculations are speculative. But they do show that the moral high ground is a potentially dangerous place for Franken to be, when the low road is paved with net vote gains. If the Franken campaign is hoping to gain legitimacy and public support through its honesty, let it be forewarned that these benefits could quickly evaporate if Franken is forced to contest the election.

Now we turn to the 1,346 absentee ballots that were identified by election officials as improperly rejected. The two campaigns must agree that a ballot was wrongfully discarded before it can be counted — and GOP Sen. Norm Coleman’s campaign is not making that easy.

The Franken team has agreed that all 1,346 ballots should be counted. But the Coleman camp is recommending the inclusion of just 778 of these ballots, as well as 67 ballots that were not flagged by election officials as improperly rejected. And guess what? The ballots are mostly from Republican-leaning areas!

From the Star Tribune:

Coleman’s proposed additions skew heavily toward suburban and rural counties where he did best in the election.

I explained in my last post why Coleman wouldn’t want all 1,346 ballots to be counted, but he seems to be going a bit overboard here. His campaign has given no indication that there’s an overarching logic to its choices, other than cherry-picking for Coleman’s own benefit.

The Coleman team will be taking a closer look at these ballots today, tomorrow and Friday.

UPDATE: The Star Tribune has analyzed 93 percent of the absentee ballots in question and determined that Franken is likely to gain from them. More motivation for Coleman’s selective approval of the ballots.