Comments on: Franken-Coleman Update, 01/13/09: Show Us The Money, Here Come The Judges

By: Sara

Sara — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:43:51 +0000

One reason the Judges tend toward the competent, regardless of party, is because of the commission that reviews appointments before they get to the Governor. Obviously the appointees are from a Governor’s own party, but the review, by law, focuses on the elements of competence,– knowledge of the law, judicial temperment, and to some degree a reasonable breadth of past legal experience. It is fairly rare that we get someone who specialized in Tax Law in one Corporation, and never peeped at another kind of law book.

The fact that they have to stand for election also matters. This has become a problem in recent years as Minnesota lost in the US Supreme Court over the question of whether Judges could run under party endorsement. Prior to a few years ago, that was State Law, but the Supremes saw otherwise and allowed for Partisian endorsements. As a result there is now a proposal to change to a system of non-competitive elections. We would vote only to continue a Judge in office. If they lost, then a new opening would exist, and a Governor could fill it. Lots of folk are concerned with Partisian Endorsements, followed by Partisian Funding of Judicial Races.

By: Albatross

Albatross — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:39:48 +0000

If Franken were behaving as Coleman is, the corporate-owned media would be hollering like a cat in a dogfighting ring. But instead the propaganda media is quiet as a mouse while Coleman harasses election workers and scrambles to find any excuse to overturn the election results.

We need campaign finance reform if we’re ever going to remove the influence of corporate money from Congress and loosen its propaganda stranglehold on our media.

By: Minnesotachuck

Minnesotachuck — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:49:56 +0000

I may be wrong, but my feeling is that in Minnesota judges should be regarded as honest until proven otherwise.

IANAL, but based on living in this state most of my life I agree. Ventura (1999-2003) was scrupulous about selecting judges based on legal skills and general reputation for wisdom. The IP had very few activists, hacks or otherwise, to reward. It’s my sense that Carlson did likewise, although I wasn’t paying as much attention in those days (1991-1999).

By: perris

perris — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:36:21 +0000

I really didn’t I have to admit, I just jumped to a conclusion which was obviously in error

sorry dakine01

By: JohnEmerson

JohnEmerson — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:26:01 +0000

I may be wrong, but my feeling is that in Minnesota judges should be regarded as honest until proven otherwise.

I’m hoping that the judges not only deny Coleman’s motions, but also rip him for throwing up chaff and playing the delaying game. That might motivate him not to try to carry it to the higher level.

By: dakine01

dakine01 — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:13:28 +0000

You did read the post correct? And note that of the three judges, one was appointed by a Democrat, one by an independent gov and the last by a somewhat rational Republican gov?

I’m thinking Normie’s only hope was for a panel of three judges appointed by Pawlenty and even then would question if they’d vote the way he wants.

By: perris

perris — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:05:56 +0000

if he has republican judges deciding his case he can easily win his suit and there is nothing we can do about that

By: jacqrat

jacqrat — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:45:39 +0000

Christy’s up at the mothership with some “about damned time!” news.

By: egregious

egregious — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:36:48 +0000

Quite the cliff hanger. Thanks for your continuing coverage!

By: Phoenix Woman

Phoenix Woman — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:31:01 +0000

He’s just about there, Dakine.