ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The Alaska Supreme Court Wednesday ruled against Joe Miller on all counts, a decision that leaves his challenge of Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s victory on life support.
“There are no remaining issues raised by Miller that prevent this election from being certified,” the Supreme Court declared in its unanimous ruling.
Murkowski leads Miller by more than 10,000 votes.
Miller’s last chance is in federal court. U.S. District Court Judge Ralph Beistline is giving Miller 48 hours to argue that the federal courts should take up any remaining constitutional issues.
Beistline has blocked the state from certifying Murkowski as the winner of the Senate race to allow the court issues to be settled. Beistline said he will decide “as soon as possible” on lifting his block following the Alaska Supreme Court ruling.
Miller has indicated he might fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, but his spokesman said Wednesday that Miller’s next move hasn’t been decided.
“We are disappointed the Alaska Supreme Court has ignored the plain text of Alaska law and allowed the Division of Elections to effectively amend the state election code, without even giving the public an opportunity for notice and comment. We are reviewing the court’s ruling and will be weighing our options,” Miller spokesman Randy Desoto said in an e-mailed statement.
Murkowski campaign manager Kevin Sweeney said he was “elated” by the Supreme Court decision and expects Beistline will allow the election to be certified next week.
“We also anticipate that Joe will continue to pursue his baseless claims in federal court until his money runs out,” Sweeney said in a written statement.
The Alaska Supreme Court ruled that Superior Court Judge William Carey was right to toss out Miller’s lawsuit over the Nov. 2 U.S. Senate race.
“We affirm the decision of the superior court in all respects,” the justices wrote in their ruling.
The Supreme Court found that the Alaska Division of Elections followed the law in counting misspelled ballots write-in ballots for Murkowski.
“Voter intent is paramount and any misspelling, abbreviation or other minor variation …does not invalidate a ballot so long as the intention of the voter can be ascertained,” the Supreme Court said in its ruling.
Miller has maintained that misspellings shouldn’t be allowed. The Supreme Court said in its ruling that Miller had argued that only his interpretation of the law would preserve integrity of the election.
“But it is Miller’s interpretation of the statute that would erode the integrity of the election system, because it would result in disenfranchisement of some voters and ultimately rejection of election results that constitute the will of the people,” the court said in its ruling. “We have consistently construed election statutes in favor of voter enfranchisement.
The Supreme Court also dismissed Miller’s suggestions of election fraud, finding that he hasn’t proven misconduct. Miller had asked for additional time to prove his allegations. But the justices wrote that “pure speculation cannot support a fishing expedition for evidence to oppose summary judgment in an election contest.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
