ummmmmmm, by that time, wouldn't there have been yet another election?
From Fox:
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has said the court fight could take years, leading Democrats, particularly in light of Specter's defection, to pressure Cornyn and his colleagues to drop the legal challenge.
"He wants to fight it in federal court and he said if necessary we'll take years to fight this Minnesota Senate seat," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill, said Monday, adding that Minnesotans deserve to have two senators in Washington.
"That's really unfortunate, and I think unfair," Durbin said.
Cornyn released a statement Monday invoking the contested 2000 presidential race between George W. Bush and Al Gore, in defending his commitment to Coleman's case.
"It's blatant hypocrisy that many of the same Democrats who so loudly complained about voter disenfranchisement during the 2000 Florida recount have been so willing to compromise their principles when it no longer fits their political agenda," he said.
Should this not be totally resolved by the Minnesota Supreme Court, it could end up in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, which could take years to be heard and decided.
If Coleman ultimately loses there, heading into the federal court system on a constitutional challenge will certainly be an option. And though getting to the U.S. Supreme Court is a long shot that could take years, election law analysts say it may be the only way to satisfy all parties.
"If you don't deal with all of the issues that have been raised in this case, then you know a lot of people are going to be questioning whether the real winner who actually ends up in the seat is actually the person who won the race, and that's not good for the kind of election process that we have, said Hans Von Spakovsky, with the conservative Heritage Foundation.
I guess when the shoe is on the other foot, Democrats don't think the shoe fits all that well...heh.
Previous posts on Coleman/Franken here and here.
.
.