Photo courtesy Paul Zukerberg.

All may not be lost for an attorney general election in 2014.

Yesterday, attorney and former At-Large candidate Paul Zukerberg—along with his attorney, Gary Thompson—made their case to D.C.’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, that there should be an attorney general election in 2014. Despite District voters voting in favor of having an elected attorney general in the 2014 election, the D.C. Council passed a bill to delay that election until 2018. The original ballot measure, the Council argued, uses ambiguous language that an attorney general election is to take place ““after Jan. 1, 2014,” but doesn’t state it has to happen in 2014.

Earlier this year, Zukerberg, who plans to run for attorney general, filed a motion for a preliminary injunction against the Council. In February, District Court Superior Judge Laura A. Cordero heard Zukerberg’s case and ultimately ruled in favor of the Council, denying Zukerberg an opportunity to run for attorney general in the April primary election.

Zukerberg and Thompson filed an appeal with the D.C. Court of Appeals, who heard his case yesterday. The Post reports that “Zukerberg might have found some sympathetic ears in the D.C. Court of Appeals,” during the hearing as they “sharply questioned” Assistant Attorney General Richard S. Love, who was representing the Council:

Both judges Catharine Friend Easterly and Roy W. McLeese III indicated that they believed that the “after Jan. 1, 2014″ language was ambiguous, despite Love arguing otherwise. (A third judge, Corinne Beckwith, spoke only once during the arguments and did not betray any particular sympathies.)

Easterly, for instance, asked whether the council would be within its rights to delay the election 100 years or 200 years if it wished. Love maintained that the council deliberately used “open-ended” language permitting any sort of delay.

Later, McLeese raised the analogy of a father telling his son, headed out to a school dance, that he must “come home after the dance.” “Does that mean if he comes home in 2018, that’s fine?” McLeese asked.

Zukerberg told DCist that they “made the strongest presentation we could make.” In addition to the brief prepared by Zukerberg and Thompson, local think tank DC Appleseed—along with half a dozen other organizations—filed an amicus brief in support of Zukerberg’s challenge, which he says helped greatly and “put the charter amendment in historical perspective.”

So, does that mean there’s still a chance there could be an attorney general election this year? Zukerberg thinks so. “There’s enough time to put it on the November ballot,” he says. Although the Appeals Court judges didn’t say when they would issue a ruling, Zukerberg says “they were cognizant in the fact that we want this election to be in 2014.”

Even if it doesn’t make it onto the general election ballot in November, they can still hold a special election for an attorney general, though Zukerberg says that isn’t ideal. “We’re racing to make this happen. It’s going to have tremendous advantage [having it on the general election ballot] than having special election.”