The ruling meets two standards that Ohio State University professor Edward Foley had set for the panel: unanimity and a willingness to grapple with whether local variations in applying state election processes violated Minnesotans’ constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law.

Foley stresses the impartiality of the ruling — as compared to, say, Bush v. Gore in 2000, on which Coleman’s claim of equal protection violations relied:

There is no doubt … that this three-judge court would have rejected the same Equal Protection claim if raised by Franken rather than Coleman.

Loyola Law School professor Rich Hasen doesn’t use the word “impartial” but he does call the ruling “careful, unanimous,” “reasonable and conservative,” and  ”detailed and measured.”

On equal protection, Hasen writes that the three-judge panel “has it both ways” — calling the issue outside the court’s scope but also rejecting it with “impressive and sensitive handling”:

As I predicted, they rejected a reading of the case that would require the counting of further illegal votes to deal with any illegal votes that had already been cast, and they rejected an argument that any lack of perfection in the casting and counting of votes constitutes a violation of equal protection.

Coleman’s equal protection argument is “not trivial,” writes Guy Charles, a University of Minnesota law professor temporarily teaching at Duke University:

But as judges and legal academics like to say, that argument proves too much … Unfortunately for Coleman, his prospects always depended upon a miracle. He wanted before and wants now more ballots to be counted. But the more ballots that are counted — by election officials, the Canvassing Board and the trial court — the better Al Franken does.

“It’s over,” Charles advises Coleman on his post-election legal battle. “It’s Kumbaya time.”

–

Chris Steller is a reporter for TWI’s sister site, The Minnesota Independent.

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.

Democratic leaders made Burris’ claim on the seat contingent on his ability to secure a formal election certificate from the state of Illinois, a document Franken will not have until Norm Coleman’s election challenges in Minnesota have been exhausted.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., in announcing a deal to seat Burris provisionally, said an election certificate is a “vital” requirement that has never been waived in modern history. [...]

The Democrats’ announcement seemed to dampen speculation that there might be an effort to seat Franken this week, in light of his 225-vote recount victory. Though some Minnesota Democrats, including U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, have suggested seating Franken pending the outcome of Coleman’s legal challenges, Minnesota law requires the full election contest be complete before the governor can sign a formal state certification. Gov. Tim Pawlenty has indicated that he will abide by the law.

That could be awhile. Another Star-Tribune piece reports that Coleman’s suit could take two months to decide.

Here’s his press release in full:

“Minnesota law reads that an election contest – not Harry Reid – should decide the winner of a contested election. The efforts of Al Franken, Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer to steal this election and seat Al Franken despite not having an election certificate are unprecedented.

“When elections are being decided by double-counted votes and double standards in the treatment of absentee ballots, there must be a remedy to get an accurate and valid vote total – that remedy is an election contest. That is the law of Minnesota enacted by the people of Minnesota. The people of Minnesota deserve to see their laws followed.

“I am confident that if the law is followed, Norm Coleman will be taking his rightful seat in the U.S. Senate.”

Unfortunately for the RNC, no one outside of the GOP appears to agree.

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.

Yesterday, Talking Points Memo reported that the Franken campaign’s numbers show the Democratic candidate trailing by just 50 votes, a significantly lower figure than the 303 reported by the Star Tribune and other news outlets. The difference comes from the campaign’s methodology, which assumes that the more the 6,000 ballot challenges will be rejected and the election judges’ initial opinions upheld. The official figure removes the challenged ballots from the overall count until the challenges are resolved.

Nate Silver of the electoral handicapping site FiveThirtyEight.com, whose magical regressions yesterday afternoon gave Norm Coleman the edge, now concludes that Franken is the slight favorite to win the race.

Of course, this is heavily based on speculation, and Coleman’s slim lead — whether 50 or 303 — is dwarfed by the 6,000 challenged ballots yet to be resolved.