Just In: Federal Court Rules Against Alaska GOP/Tea Party Candidate Joe Miller’s Write-In Vote Complaint.
 |
| First round to . . . Alaska! |
The United States District Court for the District of Alaska has ruled against GOP/Tea Party U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller’s request for a preliminary and permanent injunction that would have halted the counting of write-in votes where (1) the write-in candidate’s name was either misspelled or (2) “is not written as it appeared on the candidate’s declaration of candidacy.”
The outcome of the Alaska senatorial election contest remains uncertain, and will likely be decided by the number of write-ins for incumbent GOP Senator Lisa Murkowski. (Democratic party candidate Scott McAdams conceded defeat on Tuesday.) On Tuesday, Miller sought an injunction (and declaratory relief) to prevent the counting of the write-in ballots by the procedure decided upon by Alaska’s GOP Lieutenant Governor Craig Campbell (see his statement regarding this procedure and Miller’s lawsuit here). This process permits vote counters to determine whether misspellings of a candidate’s name are indicative of the voter’s intent to vote, or to not vote, for the candidate. State law, according to Miller, disallows this and requires that counters disallow any misspellings or failures to write-in the candidate’s name as it appears on the declaration of candidacy. No exceptions.
 |
| How did you spell Mur-kow-ski? |
The District Court, Judge Ralph R. Beistine presiding, moved quickly to rule against Miller’s request for an injunction. Miller had hoped to have his complaint argued and decided within a short time period, thus impeding the state of Alaska from responding adequately. The court, however, found that to ask the state to respond to Miller’s complaint within such a short time would be “patently unfair and that no exigent circumstances warrant such a briefing schedule.”
Injunctions are extraordinarily strong remedies, and courts require that complainants show that, without the injunction, they would suffer irreparable harm. Judge Beistine found that Miller’s complaint fell short of that standard, and explained why:
“Based on Exhibit A attached to [Miller’s] Complaint, the contested process for counting write-in votes in the Alaska U.S. Senate Race calls for segregating those ballots which reflect write-in votes for Lisa Murkowski where the name is spelled correctly and are not challenged, from ballots where the name written appears to be a variation or misspelling of ‘Murkowski.’ Given that the questionable ballots will remain segregated and subject to subsequent review, with the results recorded separately, the Court finds no good reason to enjoin counting the ballots while the underlying Complaint is addressed in due course. Plaintiff has shown no potential for irreparable harm by allowing the Division of Elections to proceed with its hand-count as scheduled. Plaintiff’s request for relief in this regard is therefore DENIED.”
See you in court!
So, the election that will affect the tenor of the Republican opposition in the Senate may not be quickly decided. An official recount is possible, and then, court maneuvers are likely. Yet, a big enough margin of victory for Murkowski or Miller after all write-ins and absentee ballots are counted would prevent that. Will the GOP be adding a moderate Murkowski (as “moderate” as Republican get) to join the Maine contingent (Snowe and Collins) and thereby bolster the possibility for compromise with Democrats on certain issues. Or will the Senate receive another Tea Partier intent upon taking no prisoners . . .?
Keep your eyes looking northward. North to Alaska!
