CBSN

Alaska High Court Throws Out Joe Miller Claims

In this Friday, Dec. 17, 2010 picture, Alaska Republican U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller, right, confers with his lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, before the Alaska Supreme Court convened in Anchorage, Alaska. On Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2010, the Alaska Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision in the disputed U.S. Senate race, saying the state correctly counted write-in votes for Sen. Lisa Murkowski. (AP Photo/Mark Thiessen, File)
AP Photo
Updated at 6:04 p.m. ET

JUNEAU, Alaska — The Alaska Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a lower court decision in the disputed U.S. Senate race, saying the state correctly counted write-in votes for Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

It is now up to Republican Joe Miller to decide if the election is finally over.

The court said in its ruling that it found "no remaining issues raised by Miller that prevent this election from being certified."

A federal judge, who had put a hold on certification to give the state courts time to rule on Miller's claims, said he would give Miller 48 hours to plead any outstanding issues to him once the high court had ruled. Miller had initially filed a lawsuit in federal court, claiming the state violated the Elections and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution in its handling of the race.

CBS News Complete Coverage: Election 2010

Miller did not immediately comment Wednesday, though his campaign has said he'd be willing to take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

The director of the state Division of Elections said the race could be certified within hours of the stay being lifted. The state and Murkowski are eager for a rapid resolution; senators are sworn in for the new Congress Jan. 5.

"We felt all along that this election should have been certified, and I'm glad the Supreme Court took the time to come to a reasoned decision," Murkowski attorney Scott Kendall said.

Miller had appealed state court Judge William Carey's decision to toss out his challenge to the state's counting of ballots for Murkowski. Miller maintained that the state should be held to the letter of the law, which calls for write-in ballots to have the oval filled in and the last name of a candidate or the name as it appears on the declaration of candidacy written in.

He wanted the results of the election to be invalidated and for a hand recount.

Murkowski mounted a write-in campaign, the likes of which Alaska had never seen, after losing the primary to Miller. Unofficial results showed her leading by 10,328 votes following a tedious, weeklong handcount of ballots. The lead narrowed to 2,169 votes when ballots challenged by Miller's campaign were excluded.

The state pointed to case law in defending its practice of using discretion in determining voter intent, allowing ballots with misspellings to be counted toward Murkowski's tally. Attorneys for the state and Murkowski argued that Miller was seeking to disenfranchise thousands of voters.

The high court, in its ruling, called voter intent "paramount," and said "any misspelling, abbreviation, or other minor variation in the form of the candidate's name on a write-in ballot does not invalidate a ballot so long as the intention of the voter can be ascertained."

"The State characterizes the standard urged by Miller as the 'perfection standard,' and we agree that such a standard would tend to disenfranchise many Alaskans on the basis of 'technical errors,"' the court decided.

Justice Craig Stowers, who recused himself, did not participate in the 4-0 decision.

The court also sided with Carey in finding the state was right not to count for Murkowski ballots in which "Lisa M." was written or Murkowski's name was written but the ballot oval wasn't filled in.