SEATTLE -

Petitioners on behalf of Gerry Pollet who sought to remove Scott White from the ballot in the 46th Legislative District had their day in court, just five days after filing their grievance on June 20. Counsel from both sides gave oral arguments in front of Judge John P. Erlick this morning at the King County Courthouse, with Erlick finally deciding in White's favor.

For a full backstory on White's potential withdrawal from the race, see this article.

Topics of debate ranged widely throughout the nearly two hour hearing, touching on topics from fax machine time stamps to the credibility of witnesses, procedures of election officials and even the relevance of fax machines in the modern age.

At one point the judge began quibbling with Pollet's lawyer over when exactly the deadline would occur, at 4:30:00.00, or 4:30:59.99, ultimately deciding that the deadline would happen at the instant the clock struck 4:30:00.00. Pollet's counsel, meanwhile, insisted that voters depended on the process remaining fair for voters and candidates alike, and that the strong likelihood of White's timely withdrawal required that he be removed from the ballot to avoid the appearance of special treatment.

White's lawyers, on the other hand, felt that Pollet's petition was frivolous since the King County elections board had followed procedure and come to a conclusion that White had never officially withdrawn.

Ultimately Judge Erlick ruled for White. He stated that King County was in the best position to make a decision on whether or not a candidate had withdrawn. Since White's late withdrawal (and therefore no withdrawal) was the original ruling, it would stand.

Still, Erlick said the entire case gave him "grave concerns" about the filing process, and added that Pollet's petition was done in good faith.  But at the end of the day, Erlick felt that ruling for Pollet would open up a can of worms that could hinder the filing process over minutiae for years to come.

The Judge also cited the importance of elections in his decision. He said elections were of "transcendent" public importance, and that seemed to have played a role in his decision to keep White in the race for the sake of voter choice.

Despite the ruling in White's favor, Pollet's supporters remained steadfast in their beliefs.

"I think that he's wrong," Paula King said of Judge Erlick. "I believe that Scott's intention was obviously to get out of the race. My perception as Joanna Q. Public is that if you're connected, you get special withdrawal allowances."

Her husband Brian agreed.

"I think the principle is that when something is sent, it is kind of like income tax, they don't say you've got to get it to the IRS by April 15. You have get it postmarked by then. It is important to protect the election process and I don't think we accomplished that today," King said.

Afterward Pollet still was baffled by the mistaken time stamps and felt justice was not done on the front of how White's withdrawal should have been handled. Still, he felt vindicated by a portion of the ruling.

"We brought this to have a judge sort through the conflicting claims and the judge agreed in his own words that there were ‘grave concerns' about how the county elections treated Scott White's request to be reinstated," Pollet said.

"We know that King County elections fax machines are not reliable. We know that voters and candidates in the future cannot rely on faxing to King County Elections despite the law saying that you can fax things and we know that Scott White himself used the King County Executive's office and, under oath, Scott White himself affirmed that he had withdrawn on time," Pollet continued. "Under oath a King County elections staff person said Scott White called and said, ‘I can prove I withdrew on time' and then he changed his mind late in the day."

The failed petition would not discourage Pollet from remaining vigilant, nor does it look to keep him from making this withdrawal fracas a campaign issue.

"We are continuing to talk to the voters of the 46th about the issues and the need for integrity," he said.

White was similarly energized by the ruling, and used the occasion to hit his opponent for what he called a very divisive strategy, and a common one for Pollet, to use against a fellow Democrat.

"This has been a very public wake up call for me," White said in a release after the ruling. "I made a mistake in a moment of weakness and my opponent pursued a cynical political ploy to steal the race before anyone voted.  If anything, this distraction has strengthened my commitment to winning this race.

"While my opponent knocks on court room doors looking for the easy way out, I'm going to continue taking my campaign to the doorsteps of real people in the 46th district," said White.  "My campaign is about fully funding K-12 education, cleaning up Puget Sound and securing health care for everyone in our state - not frivolous lawsuits. This isn't the first time my opponent has used divisive tactics and relied upon failed legal arguments to try and advance his personal agenda, and it's why he would be a marginal, ineffective legislator."

Now with both candidates assured a spot on the "top two" ballot this August, and a Republican opponent whose opposition is merely nominal in the liberal 46th, the fight goes on another day for White and Pollet. The battle of the King County Courthouse will soon be remembered as just one in a longer war to reach the statehouse.