[eureka!]

From the other thread to start discussion (with thanks for all you contribute on matters constitutional):

Interesting SNAFU by the clerk. Unfortunately, I think that your Catch 22 scenario may play the Court's hand. They can't toss a duly elected Senator, especially if it means control. Lautenberg needs to win. The issue, however, would not necessary be moot in that the issue is surely to arise again (think Hawaii) and the Court may say "Okay, Rats, here's the Rule of Law, to be enforced strictly by the District Courts and if they are in your pocket the Court of Appeals and if it is the Ninth then us. All on shortened time." Maybe throw a little reference to Rule 11 of the FRCP in their as a reminder for the lawyers who consider filing in the future.

I can dream can't I? ;^)

[Eala]

They can't toss a duly elected Senator

Isn't that the essence of the action?

[pepsionice]

Seems like we should take a look at this clerk. No one could be that stupid.

[hobbes1]

And just who determines who is a Duly elected Senator ?

[Rockiesrider]

Your point regarding the chances of unseating an elected senator appears correct. Maybe relief would be in the form of reimburstment of all moneys spent on the election by Forrester perhaps even in triplicate? This might even be the case if Forrester wins?