Gutknecht responds to being served
Shock but not awe
"A funny thing happened to me a week ago," writes Rep. Gil Gutknecht in an article published in the Winona Daily News, Sunday, August 20. "I was in my driveway, grilling chicken on a Saturday night when a nice man in a Jeep Liberty drove up." The man said he was there to serve him legal papers.
Gutknecht continues, "The papers were details of a lawsuit filed to keep my name off the ballot during the September primary and, presumably, the November general election.
"I was surprised. I’d never been served before. Another thought came to mind:... 'How much do you tip a guy who serves you with papers?'"
Despite Mr. Gutknecht's humor, being embroiled in a lawsuit at this point of his campaign, especially over a process he's bee doing for 12 years, must be a shock. And I can empathize. One thing that drives me crazy is being accused of something I know I'm not guilty of.
On point is obvious: The Gutknecht campaign has felt that it has been following the correct procedure in submitting a petition in place of the filing fee for his candidacy. The difficulty it's forced to face is that Minnesota election law is ambiguous on the subject of when the signatures for the filing fee waiver petition can be collected: Actually, it simply doesn't say.
The question that the Minnesota Supreme Court must decide is whether there is no time limit, as the Minnesota Secretary of State and the Gutknecht campaign argue, or whether the 14-day time limit for collecting signatures on filing petitions (not filing fee waiver petitions) that are applicable to non-major party endorsed candidates applies.
But is the lawsuit "a political dirty trick," as Mr. Gutknecht contends?
One way to evaluate such charges would be to ask: Would the charge be valid if the sides were switched? In other words, would it be a "a political dirty trick" if Tim Walz submitted a petition instead of paying the filing fee and the Republicans brought the legal challenge?
The lawsuit does raise valid questions. And it's too bad for the political process that the Minnesota legislature didn't write a more clearly worded law. But a "political dirty trick" it is not. Call it what you will, in the long run it's just part of the process in tweaking and improving our ever-evolving democratic system.
LP
The court case is online here. From the case website: "Oral arguments will be heard before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, Aug. 22, 9 a.m. in Minnesota Judicial Center Room 300. Seating is first-come, first-served. The Rochester Post-Bulletin and KAAL-TV Rochester will provide the pool cameras, and Minnesota Public Radio has reserved the audio jack in the courtroom."
"A funny thing happened to me a week ago," writes Rep. Gil Gutknecht in an article published in the Winona Daily News, Sunday, August 20. "I was in my driveway, grilling chicken on a Saturday night when a nice man in a Jeep Liberty drove up." The man said he was there to serve him legal papers.
Gutknecht continues, "The papers were details of a lawsuit filed to keep my name off the ballot during the September primary and, presumably, the November general election.
"I was surprised. I’d never been served before. Another thought came to mind:... 'How much do you tip a guy who serves you with papers?'"
Despite Mr. Gutknecht's humor, being embroiled in a lawsuit at this point of his campaign, especially over a process he's bee doing for 12 years, must be a shock. And I can empathize. One thing that drives me crazy is being accused of something I know I'm not guilty of.
On point is obvious: The Gutknecht campaign has felt that it has been following the correct procedure in submitting a petition in place of the filing fee for his candidacy. The difficulty it's forced to face is that Minnesota election law is ambiguous on the subject of when the signatures for the filing fee waiver petition can be collected: Actually, it simply doesn't say.
The question that the Minnesota Supreme Court must decide is whether there is no time limit, as the Minnesota Secretary of State and the Gutknecht campaign argue, or whether the 14-day time limit for collecting signatures on filing petitions (not filing fee waiver petitions) that are applicable to non-major party endorsed candidates applies.
But is the lawsuit "a political dirty trick," as Mr. Gutknecht contends?
One way to evaluate such charges would be to ask: Would the charge be valid if the sides were switched? In other words, would it be a "a political dirty trick" if Tim Walz submitted a petition instead of paying the filing fee and the Republicans brought the legal challenge?
The lawsuit does raise valid questions. And it's too bad for the political process that the Minnesota legislature didn't write a more clearly worded law. But a "political dirty trick" it is not. Call it what you will, in the long run it's just part of the process in tweaking and improving our ever-evolving democratic system.
LP
The court case is online here. From the case website: "Oral arguments will be heard before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, Aug. 22, 9 a.m. in Minnesota Judicial Center Room 300. Seating is first-come, first-served. The Rochester Post-Bulletin and KAAL-TV Rochester will provide the pool cameras, and Minnesota Public Radio has reserved the audio jack in the courtroom."
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home