Democrats, GOP ask judge to clarify pretrial rulings

Attorneys for Dino Rossi and the Democratic Party will be back in Chelan County Superior Court Friday trying to get a judge to clarify important pretrial decisions in the Republican legal challenge to the November election.

The two sides take very different tacks in what could be the last round in court before Republicans make their case for having a judge throw out the election of Gov. Christine Gregoire.

Democrats are looking for the most detailed clarification. Attorneys for the state party filed a 19-page proposed order to Judge John Bridges asking for specific guidelines, including a ruling that Republicans must show which candidate got each alleged illegal vote in the governor's election.

Attorneys for Rossi and the other Republicans who joined the lawsuit are asking for much less. They submitted a three-page proposed order, which is little more than a list of which motions Bridges denied and granted during a full-day hearing Feb. 4.

Bridges made a series of decisions that day, including denying Democrats' attempts to have the case dismissed or transferred to the state Supreme Court. The judge ruled from the bench after hearing arguments from attorneys for Rossi, for the Democratic Party, for Secretary of State Sam Reed, and for counties and county auditors.

The judge refused to dismiss the case but did dismiss the counties and the auditors.

He also granted a Democratic motion, saying he would not have the authority to call for a new election if he nullified the November election. The law says a judge has the power to "set aside" the election and declare a different winner.

Democrats and Republicans disagreed about the specifics of Bridges' ruling on illegal votes. The question is whether Republicans need to prove in court that there were so many illegal votes cast for Gregoire that, if all illegal votes were subtracted from both candidates, Rossi would have won.

Republicans have said it is enough to show that because of counting flaws, administrative errors, illegal votes by felons and votes made under the names of dead people, it is impossible to know who really won.

Bridges, citing the state "election contest" law, said an election cannot be set aside unless "it appears that an amount of illegal votes has been given" to the winner that, if taken away, would reverse the election results.

He did not specify whether Republicans had to show which candidate received each illegal vote, or, as Republican attorneys say, they can show more generally that there were enough illegal votes that it "appears" Rossi should have won.

Democrats want Bridges to rule that Republicans must show which candidate received each illegal vote and that "the net effect would result in Mr. Rossi having more legal votes than Governor Gregoire."

Democratic Party attorney Kevin Hamilton said the Democrats' proposed order is "really trying as faithfully as possible to capture" what Bridges said in the courtroom.

He said he did not know why Republicans made no attempt to expand on the rulings beyond a tally of which motions were granted and which were denied.

"I think in a case like this of this magnitude and importance the judge wants to explain his reasoning," Hamilton said.

A spokeswoman for Rossi said Democrats' lengthy proposed order shows they weren't as happy with Bridges' rulings as they claimed after the Feb. 4 hearing.

"I think they're trying to monkey around with what the judge ordered," said spokeswoman Mary Lane.

David Postman: 360-943-9882 or dpostman@seattletimes.com