July 17, 2008 - 4:42pm
Democratic Party to appeal Hoffman case to Maine Supreme Court
By Politicker StaffThe Maine Democratic Party will appeal to the state Supreme Court in its case against the Secretary of State's office over the inclusion of Herbert Hoffman on the November ballot in the U.S. Senate race.
In a statement, the party gave two reasons for pursuing an appeal:
First, in its ruling Monday, the Superior Court left open the door on what is an acceptable legal process for collecting petition signatures. We believe an oath by definition must be truthful and that any court case that ratifies false oaths will undermine the legitimacy of our democratic process. The precedent that Justice Marden's ruling would create could change the way petition signatures are gathered in Maine, and we fear that if the process is not clarified and resolved, it will only lead to similar confusion-and ultimately more legal cases-in the future. With other petition challenges likely, we believe the State Supreme Court must clarify and settle the law in this matter.
Second, what's at stake in this November's election is simply too important to have someone on the ballot who did not obtain enough valid signatures. We still maintain that, while perhaps not intentional, Mr. Hoffman was not in the presence of enough individuals who signed his petitions to put him over the 4,000 signature threshold that the Legislature created to ensure that a candidate has at least a small measure of support.
Article Tools
Contributors
Wally Edge
Rob Tornoe
To view more cartoons by Politicker.com editorial cartoonist Rob Tornoe, click here. >
Adam Cote
I attended my first political "house party" in 1994 when I was a senior in college. It was hosted by one of former U.S. Sen. George ... >
Chris Cinquemani
It’s crunch time. Less than 30 days remain until we head to the polls to vote for President down to School Board—unless you’re joining ... >
Poll
How close will the Allen-Collins race be?
Within 2 points
15%
Within 5 points
8%
Within 10 points
15%
Within 15 points
23%
Wider
38%
PolitickerME Partners
| Politicker INTERACTIVE | |
 |
The Pindell Report Keep up with the races in your state |
 |
Lawmaker Profile Follow the funding of your representatives |
 |
270 to Win Predict the road to the White House |
Top Tags
Most Active Stories
- UPDATED: ‘The first dude’ in Palmyra
- Todd Palin heading to Northern Maine
- Photos: Todd Palin visits Maine
- Schumer: Dems ‘closing in’ on Collins
- Carey’s casino PAC left in debt
- Video: Palin event introductions
- Jackpot!
- Tornoe's Toons: The 'First Dude' comes to Palmyra
- American Medical Association kicks in 40K for No on ONE Campaign
- Negative mailer raises concerns in SD 30
- Brokeback Sheriff
- Campaign: ‘Huckabee has not wavered’
- Kucinich fans encouraged to continue their support
- First day back in the House: 5 sworn in
- Cianchette commits to free trade, reducing narcotic supply and re-learning Spanish in confirmation hearing for ambassador post
- Attack of the Ronulans
- Ron Paul supporters?
- The Republican Response - The Unabridged Version with Translation
- Rove: Obama's inexperienced; Biden's a 'big, blowhard doofus'
- Small island, big names: How North Haven produced two prominent politicians
Quote of the Day
October 10, 2008
"If that's not personal, I don't know what is."
-- U.S. Sen. Susan Collins on fliers circulated by MoveOn.org that depicted her with blacked-out teeth.
-Associated Press, 10/9/08
Recent Press Releases
Syndicate
Pathetic
As a Democrat this completely disgusts me. If Tom Allen is so pathetically weak that he can't beat Susan Collins at a time when Republican popularity polls are in the single digits then he does not deserve to win.
This pathetic attempt to stifle dissent in the party is going to boomerang on Allen. Tom Allen wouldn't be in such a precarious position if he had actually accomplished something in the 12 years he has been in Washington.
Unless Tom Allen develops a spine and comes out to denounce this effort I and many other Democrats are going to hold our noses and vote for Hoffman or Collins.
What's at stake
"Second, what's at stake in this November's election is simply too important...."
I wonder how the court will view an emotional argument that is purely subjective? I'm expecting a slap down for the Maine Democratic Party in the written opinion of the state Supreme Court.
The lower courts ruling is based on precedent. The ruling of the court earlier this week did not create precedent. On this I expect another slap down in the state Supreme Court opinion.
If there was justice the state Supreme Court would have the Maine Democratic Party pay Hoffman's court costs as well as the state's court costs.
Couldn't agree more. This
Couldn't agree more. This really puts a black eye on the Democratic party. And I also wonder who's gonna' pay. What is Allen so afraid of? I won't vote for him now because this makes him look very weak.
Out of context
David Hughes - I assume you left out the rest of that sentence deliberately, because it completely contradicted your comment.
The Dems have a perfectly reasonable claim: that Hoffman didn't follow the rules when gathering signatures.
He signed his name to a legal document that said he was the signature gatherer when he was not. That's not subjective at all. (And as far as I've read, Hoffman doesn't dispute that fact.)
Whether the court throws out the whole petitions or not, I have no idea, but the argument is anything but subjective. He didn't follow the (very simple) rules, and everybody else did.
Please!
Disgusted Democrat says
Wha? This is NOT an attempt to stifle dissent within the party. Tom Ledue just ran a primary campaign against Allen. That was dissent within the party, and it was handled appropriately, by the party and by the Allen campaign. Ledue was a complete unknown and a longshot, but he threw his hat in the ring and did his best.
Say what you want about Ledue, but he did it the right way. Hoffman, on the other hand, is just an ego biscuit. The Dems have every right to keep people who can't bother to do the actual work of Democratic politics (like, you know, gathering signatures and competing in primaries) off the ballot when they violate election law.
And I hope that the "Dems"
And I hope that the "Dems" remember this when the shoe is on the other foot. I suspect they won't. I was speaking to a friend recently that is just as soured by these tactics. And we've both been "Dems" before most of you were in diapers. So I hope the court rules with hoffman. He might very well be an ego biscuit, but have you ever known a politician that isn't? And I did notice that no one has answered the question as to the cost of all this and who will pay.
The Empire strikes back
It is pretty clear that the Maine Democratic Party is not particularly keen on democracy, especially when it concerns their pursuit for power.
Whether the Democrats win or lose this case they will lose in the eyes of the public. Either they are cynically perusing a case they can't win - simply to drain the resources of an opponent. Or they are bullying a weaker and less resourceful opponent out of the race. Either way this makes Ton Allen and the Democratic Party bosses look very very bad.
Darth Vader would be proud.
This isn't about winning in
This isn't about winning in November, this is about winning in 2010.
Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, knows that Tom Allen agreed to run for Senate as the sacrificial lamb against an overwhelmingly popular senator, as a trade-off to the Dems for a shot at Governor.
Allen is using his backers to finance a name-recognition bonanza as a lead-up to a run for governor in 2010. The only thing standing in his way is a landslide defeat against Collins that embarrasses him.
So Hoffman's 3, 4, 5 percent wont mean a win or a loss for Allen, he'll lose no matter what. But it does mean the difference between a 7 point loss and a 10 point loss, or a 10 point loss and a 13 point loss.
Hoffman is spending legal fees to keep Allen's dim light burning for 2010, plain and simple.
no link, not out of context
The SOS and the courts have ruled that the rest of the sentence simply isn't so.
The law is not only composed of the statute but also of prior decisions of the court. Prior decisions of the court make it pretty clear that the SOS did the right thing, that while Hoffman may have made mistakes those mistakes do not rise to the level the Democratic Party wants them to and that the Maine Democratic Party is desperately grasping at any straw it can to keep Hoffman off the ballot.
I'm sorry link, but even one of the cases the Dems cited in their challenge to Superior Court was over turned on appeal - meaning even that case ultimately supported the SOS and Hoffman.
Maine Democratic Party should be made to pay court costs because the lawsuit is so frivolous at its core.
Umm...
So the party should not be allowed to exercise its legal right to appeal a decision it finds faulty? What?
Yes they should be allowed
Yes they should be allowed to exercise their legal right. And I'm going to exercise my legal right not to vote for Allen. In fact, I'm going to let everyone at work, on the street, every truck driver that backs up to my dock, and anyone else that I can find, know what the dems are up to. That's my legal right. Anyone wanna' take me to court?
Campaign Blunder
Campaign Blunder
By challenging the candidate petition signatures of Independent U.S. Senate Candidate Herb Hoffman in court, the Maine Democratic Party has committed an amateur and egregious political mistake. They have authenticated and created free publicity for a financially-strapped, independent opponent; perceived a feeling of desperation in their own candidate’s campaign; sacrificed time and energy away from their principal opponent-Republican Susan Collins; and portrayed an “ogre-like” mentality in the “fair and hopeful” Democratic Party message. I agree with the Disgusted Democrat, beating up on the “little guy” over signatures that the Secretary of State has officially certified only perceives Tom Allen as a “precarious” candidate who can't stand on his record.
Post new comment