The Supreme Court on Bush vs Gore - Jan Crawford Greenburg

[CUPCAKEASSASSlN]

wait they count our votes??

[SCE2AUX]

Anyone else think that if you can't make a clear hole in a piece of cardboard (or read the f'ing DIRECTIONS for those of you in Palm Beach) - and you don't notify an attendent of your inability - you are too irresponsible to be voting in the first place?

[GregWn]

The Florida State Supreme Court was not doing it without standards. The Court was using the "clear intent of the voter" standard as stated in Florida Law. Had the Florida State Supreme Court ordered a different standard it would have been accused of making law and violating Article II of the Constitution. Therefore, the Florida Supreme Court was in a "no win" circular reasoning dilemma.

[INDYANDY4C]

I would remind everyone that the Court voted 7-2 on the issue that the recount was wrong! They were 5-4 on how the recount should be resolved on counties to counties count votes. DOES 1:1 = 1 or should every county in FLA count 1:1=1?

[GregWn]

@INDYANDY4C Did you listten to the entire video? Greenburg states that Soutler and Breyer only voted for an equal protection violation to appease Kennedy and attempt to get him to agree wtih them on a remedy.

[SimulacrumMaster]

also worth mentioning, is that revotes are inherently corrupt activities. politically biased agencies decide which votes are rejected and which are included. the only thing worth the public's time is a re-VOTE, which gore never asked for.

[GregWn]

@SimulacrumMaster The recount was being conducted with members of both parties attending, and the final recount was being conducted by judges. The Florida Supreme Court did order a statewide recount, but the US Supreme Court halted the recount because it didn't want to cause harm to Bush. Incredible. A revote was never possible, even in Palm Beach County.

[SimulacrumMaster]

@GregWn It doesn't matter who is involved in a recount. Look into the recount that resulted in Al Franken being elected, where both sides and the judiciary were involved. Votes were added or subtracted in districts, depending on whether it helped Franken. One district had more votes than registered voters after the recount, but it was not corrected. The Florida 2000 fiasco was even worse, only revoting would have solved it.

[SimulacrumMaster]

liberal justices are the reason why public faith has been undermined in the supreme court as an institution. :/

[phillipmarch22]

Another good case to read up on is Kilo v. New London, Conneticut. It is an imminate domain issue. It includes a corrupt Republican Govenor, Pfizer Pharmaceutal, and a women named Suzette Kilo. A very good book to read about this case is called: The Little Pink House by Jeff Benedict. After doing all the research and writing the book he switched political parties from an R to a D. One good thing that came from the decision is the states took a hard look at their imminent domain laws. Thank God!

[zgreggz83]

Even though I voted for Gore, and thought Bush stole the election, I think the Supreme Court MAY have got it right. The Florida Supreme Court did not show equal protection by failing to include overvotes in its recount. The US Supreme Court does usually has a very narrow interpretation of equal protection, but this was not just a ruling of a state's affairs, it had national implications. So please tell me where I am wrong in this assessment.

[phillipmarch22]

A very good article to read on the bush v. Gore Supreme Court case is called "None Dare Call It Treason" by Vincent Bugulosi. (You can find it on line.) Bugulosi (sic) is a retired L.A. Prosecutor. His claim to fame was that he was the Prosecutor on the Charles Mansen case and he wrote the book Helter Zelter. He also wrote a book on the OJ Simpson trial. They guy knows law. After reading None Dare Call it Treason, I was 100% convinced bush was appointed President in 2000 by the US Supreme Court.

[zgreggz83]

Ok, will take a look. But I know this guy also thinks that Oswald was the sole killer in the JFK murder case, so he loses a LOT of credibility with me over that, especially when he compares those that believe in a JFK conspiracy to those that believe OJ Simpson was innocent.

[phillipmarch22]

Do you believe that O.J. Simpson was innocent and do you believe the JFK conspiracy?

[zgreggz83]

OJ Simpson was guilty and Oswald did not act alone. In fact, considerable doubt Oswald even fired a shot.

[zgreggz83]

Thanks for reference. Bugulosi says , " On Friday, December 8, the Florida court, so finding, ordered a manual recount (authorized under § 102.166(4)(c) of the Florida Election Code) of all disputed ballots (around 60,000) throughout the entire state." Wrong! The Florida Supreme Court only looked at undervotes, and that was one of the tenets of the US Supreme's Court equal protection ruling.

[phillipmarch22]

I guess what I am saying is that there was absolutely NO reason the US Supreme Court should have been involved with this. bush is the one that involved the US Supreme Court out of fear. Like Bugulosi said, Gore is the one that should have went the the US S Court. Florida could have handled this just like Franken v. Coleman in Minnesota.

[phillipmarch22]

The US Supreme Court should not in anyway, (whatever party they belong too) sway any decision they make. The 5 justices did exactly that. Again, when Scalia wrote that his decision on bush v. Gore should not be used in future election decisions, it should have made front page of every newspaper in America!

[zgreggz83]

All 9 justices agreed that the case be referred to the US Supreme Court. According to the justices, "As a general rule, this court defers to a state court's interpretation of a state statute"...but then they went on to note that both the US Constitution and federal law also governed the conduct of presidential elections.

[phillipmarch22]

Tthis was a Florida voting issue and should have stayed that way. In reading None Dare Call it Treason, it should have been Gore who contacted the SC, not bush.

Bush is as corrupt as the day is long. Gore could have certainly retained a better attorney, that is for sure.

I enjoy our back and forth, but I will die believing that the 2000 election was a travesty of epic proportions. (Cracks me up how we get all involved in Iraqs and Irans elections when we can't even do it right!

[phillipmarch22]

I know you were addresssing someone else, but what was wrong is bush stepped in with the US Supreme Court to stop the counting of the undervotes. By doing that, NONE of the votes in the United States were valid. Again, I go back to Franken v. Coleman, that is the way it could have been done. bush was scared shitless and pulled in the S Court. The damage bush has done in the last 8 years will take decades to un-do. cheny/bush are war criminals & mass murders. I hope they like the heat!

[zgreggz83]

Appears Franken v. Coleman type of decision was similar to the US Supreme Court. The MN. Supreme Court refused to send it to back to the lower courts for additional counting...ala the US Supreme Court refusing to send it back for additional counting.

[zgreggz83]

Bush stepped in to claim a violation of equal protection because equal voting standards did not exist. My question is if the Florida Supreme Ct. had established standards would the US Supreme Ct. then ruled for Bush claiming a violation of Article II of the US Constitution?

[zgreggz83]

(I think this is why the Fla. State Supreme Ct. did not set standards; regardless, the ct. blew it by failing to include overvotes. Nonetheless, the US Supreme Ct should have sent it back for a recounting of ALL disputed votes...IF TIME REMAINED. (Still no agreement if final date was 12/12 0r 12/18; however US Supreme Ct. cited Florida State Supreme Ct. ruling the safe harbor deadline was 12/12, leaving no time for recount.

[zgreggz83]

Interesting though that both Breyer and Souter wanted the case sent back to the Florida State Supreme Court for the establishing of a uniform standard and additional counting to be complete by the 12/18 Electoral College meeting. The majority justices decided the deadline was 12/12. THAT WAS CRUCIAL. Which date was right meant just about everything.

[zgreggz83]

Even the majority recognized the right to recount with a uniform standard but the majority said no time remained because they decided 12/12 was the deadline.

[zgreggz83]

But even if it was sent back for recounting and Gore won, a Republican appeal means the 12/18 deadline would not have been met. So the Florida Supreme Court would have ordered the Florida Governor to certify the election for Gore, but the Florida Legislature would have disputed that and sent its own set of electors for Bush.

[zgreggz83]

So you would have had two sets of electors, one for Gore and one for Bush, and not sure what would have happened then. My guess is that it would have come to Congress to recognize one slate, and the Republican controlled congress would have voted for the Bush electors, and, thereby, Bush would still have been "elected" president.

[phillipmarch22]

It wouldn't have mattered to me if bush had become President in 2000, if he had done it legally. I remember after the Florida/Supreme Court debacle was over, I told a friend of mine, "How can I honestly look in my son and daughter's eyes and tell them their vote really counts. That is what was so upsetting to me!

Again, enjoy chatting with someone who is passionate about this issue although we may disagree on some issues. Have a nice day!

[zgreggz83]

So she is saying that Breyer and Souter never bought the equal protection argument but only voted in favor of it in order to try and convice Kennedy to agree to seek as a remedy the return of the case to the Florida Supreme Court? Interesting. I never heard that before.

[exbronco1980]

most americans don't have a big problem with George W. Bush.

[Corporations8MyBaby]

Hahahahahaha.... right. He's the most hated president in US History.

[exbronco1980]

@Corporations8MyBaby Most Americans don't like him. but most of the people who don't like him feel that way for silly reasons. they're upset with him about high gas prices and stuff like that. Not many americans recognize him as the true evil he really is. if a lot of americans hated him, he'd be getting prosecuted for something. i don't see any prosecution, and he's never gonna get prosecuted for anything.

[Corporations8MyBaby]

exbronco1980 ~ I love your faith in the democratic power of our citizenry. I think we will someday have that again, but currently the military-industrial-infotainme­nt media- wall st. complex can quash our burning desire to put Cheney, Addington, Yoo Rove and others on trial for torture or outing a NOC CIA officer. But I am not whining. Awake & reacquainted with our founder's vision we can do anything.

[Frankieireland]

@exbronco1980 most non americans have a problem with americans because they don't have a problem with bush.

[Rhino8416]

Does a conservative ever do anything good or right? Does a liberal ever do anything bad or wrong?

[Oopaack]

Yes.

[exbronco1980]

"conservatives are unrepentant."  when do u ever hear a conservative apologize for anything? almost never.

[SCE2AUX]

Even without the USSC, the time limits involved would have lead to Bush being certified the winner in Florida.

[zgreggz83]

Not too sure. At the rate the judges were counting the Florida Supreme Court could have finished by December 18. Still considerable argument over whether 12/12 or 12/18 should have been the final date. My question is the resolution if Gore won the recount and Bush appealed. Would that have extended the deadline past 12/18 and forced the decision to the Florida Legislature? If so, your statement is correct.

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX Not if Kathryn Harris didn't step in to delay the process, as well as the Republican fueled riots that stopped the Miami-Dade recount.

[ZDWmiamicane]

This case is boring and I'm tired of hearing about President Bush. (And I voted for the man)!

[crumbtrey]

Black-robed baboons.

[DW8814]

How many times do you recount an election, the two counts that were done showed that Bush was ahead of Gore. It was Gore who pushed all this into the Courtrooms.

[UdallIn72]

There was only one recount completed--the machine recount.

The hand recount was never finished.

And the issue of who would have won had all the votes been counted is beside the point.

The real outrage is that a great many votes were never counted.

Not even once.

[phillipmarch22]

You have done your homework Udalln72! The US Supreme Court stopped the counting. If you want to get the low-down on that decision, read "None Dare Call It Treason" by Vincent Bugosi. It is an article that you can find on line. Bush was appointed President by the conservative US Supreme Court in 2000. Scaila and Sanda Day O'Conner are criminals and the other 5 are too. (It was 7-2)

[zgreggz83]

But Souter and Breyer wanted to remedy the equal protection problem by returning the case to Florida for futher counting based on a uniform standard to be established by the Florida Supreme Court.

[GregWn]

@phillipmarch22 If you agree with Geenburg here, Breye and Souter only agreed with the equal protection argument in an effort to pacify Kenndy and get him to vote for a remedy. The Court would have remanded to the Florida Supreme Court to set a standard if time remained, which it would have but not for the delays of Harris and the Republicans, and the setting of the 12./12 date by Bois rather than fighting for the true 12/18 date.

[phillipmarch22]

@GregWn Hi Greg, thanks for your comments. The Presidential election of 2000 should have played off the same way the Coleman/Franken election did. I am not sure if I mentioned it before, please google an article called, None Dare Call It Treason by Vincent Bulgosi. That article convinced me that bush was appointed President by the US Supreme Court and was a travesty. We get involved in other countries elections and we do THIS? Unbelievable beyond words!

[zgreggz83]

The machine recount was never completed. 18 counties never ran the ballots through the machines again as required by Florida law. These 18 couonties had 1.58 million votes.

[plogjayhawk7568]

They never finished the hand recounts and the machines do not register votes from damaged ballots or hanging chads or dimple chads so we still don't know who more people voted for yet.

[exbronco1980]

it was bush who took it to the supreme court. and i think florida law required a recount since it was so close. that corrupt katherine harris and Jeb Bush were trying to steal it. was gore just supposed to sit by and let them?

[itsmezed]

You leave out that it is supposed to be a total recount, and Gore only wanted recounts done in heavily Democratic counties. In fact, after every one of the repeated recounts, Bush won. It's going on 10 years ago, get over it.

[exbronco1980]

@itsmezed tell the families of the more than 4000 americans that died in george w. bush's iraq war to get over it. as for me, i'm not gonna get over it. not until that piece of human garbage is in prison for the crimes he committed.

[zgreggz83]

no, no no...Gore did not take it to the entire state because Florida had no method to request a statewide recount. You had to go to each of the 67 canvassing boards, and with Kathryn Harris at the helm to certify in 7 days, Gore did not have time to recount the entire state.

Also wrong on the recounts. The National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago showed that Gore won on even the most conservative method of recounting the ballots.

[GregWn]

@itsmezed Get over it...what a hypocit!! You are still writing about it! Gore had little choice because there was no mechanism for a Statewide recount. Each county has to be petioned individually, and only would agree to a recount if the local canvessing board voted for a recount.

[GregWn]

@itsmezed So, Gore did not have time for a Statewide recount, especially with Bush stoolie Katherin Harris as Secreatary of State to enforce the seven day deadline, and the politcial pressure of losing recount bids in Republican counties.

[SCE2AUX]

@GregWn Yeah, gee...gosh. The Secretary of State enforcing the applicable laws. Oy the shame.

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX You do not know the full scope of the facts. The law also requires a recount, and as noted by the Florida Supreme Court, the Florida Secretary of State acted imapproriately in her decisions and delays. So you can take back you gee and gosh and get educated.

[SCE2AUX]

@GregWn Yes. There was a recount. A recount in accordance with the applicable laws.

Gore conceded. A shame that the rest of you can't grow up and do the same.

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX You need an education! Go back and read the facts of the case. No complete recount was ever performed. First, a total of 18 counties—accounting for a quarter of all votes cast in Florida—did not carry out the legally mandated machine recount. Secondly, recounts required under State law in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach County were never completed (stopped in Palm Beach due to Republican operatives storming the County Canvassing Board recount).

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX Thirdly, Secretary of State Kathryn Harris, who was also a Bush delegate and co-chair of Bush's campaign in Florida, improperly instructed the counties that a manual recount was not legal, causing a five-day delay in the counting of ballots (ruled improper by Florida Attorney General Butterworth followed by local judge Jorge LaBarge and affirmed by the Florida Supreme Court).

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX As a result, Palm Beach county stopped counting during its one per cent review to determine if a full recounting was needed, and the county recounted all its votes to a more restrictive standard. Prior to undue influence by Kerey Carpenter, Gore had gained more than 50 votes; after the standard was changed Gore had only gained 6 or 7 votes (the new standard was so restrictive that it violated the "clear intent of the voter" mandate in Florida law.

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX . This can be seen by the yield rate in Palm Beach; only 5% of the re-examined ballots were recognized as votes in Palm Beach, contrasted with 25% in Broward and Volusia counties. The Palm Beach Post examined the ballots after the election and determined that if Palm Beach County had applied a standard similar to Broward and Volusia, it would have garnered an additional 584 votes for Gore, more than the final certified total of Bush's 537-vote victory.

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX And this was just in the one per cent sample of the entire county's votes!). Finally, the Florida State Supreme Court ruled for a recount of all under votes in the entire state, but the United States Supreme Court inexplicably stayed the recount because of irreparable harm to petitioner Bush!

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX Regardless, despite the fact that the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that equal protection was violated, it only stated that no remedy existed because insufficient time remained for the Florida Supreme to set a standard for a Statewide recount.

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX If not for the delays caused by Harris and other Republican operatives, including the thugs the stormed Miami-Dade, the Court would have remanded the case back to the Florida Supreme Court for setting a standard to recount all votes, include both under and over votes. As seen by later analysis, such a standard would have resulted in a Gore victory. Gore only conceded because, as the United States Supreme Court ruled, time had run out.

[GregWn]

@SCE2AUX Then Kathryn Harris, after delaying the vote counting for five days, turns around and rules that the counties are too slow in counting and she is going to certify the election without the manual recounts, one day after the Court ruled she improperly delayed the counting of votes by five days! Further, Kathryn Harris sent a member of her staff, attorney Kerey Carpenter, down to Palm Beach County to improperly influence the standard used to recount votes.

[zgreggz83]

The counts were not complete. Even the machine recounts were not complete. 18counties never even ran the ballots through a second time as required by Florida Election law. Gore was entitled to a recount under Florida law, which was the clear intent of the voter, which by case law included counting ballots that showed intent despite voter error.

[GregWn]

@DW8814 Once. There was never a complete recount. Even the machine recount was faulty as many counties did not run the ballots through the machines again as required. You need to look at the facts.

[phillipmarch22]

@DW8814 How many times do you re-count an election? Until you get it right! The US Supreme court for the first time in American history appointed a President. Goggle an article called: None Dare Call It Treason by Vincent Bugolsi. If that doesn't convince you, nothing will!

[GregWn]

@DW8814 Votes never counted once. And Bush filed the first court case.

[dovecry2]

If the Supreme Court had not legalized killing I would have gotten to know all 4 sons not just 3 - yeah things would have really been different for me.

[J19901]

If Gore would have become the president of the united states then things would have been really different.

[dgagnon313]

Bush v. Gore was a travesty. Don't fault the judgment of the American people that it was such.

The Supreme court failed and history will remind us of this terrible act for the rest of our lives.

Very unfortunate.

[qazqashire]

what?! SO, the key to bush v gore lay with kennedy, NOT o'connor! i thought toobin said the swing vote in that case was o'connor, as it often was!

kennedy is probably the most powerful supreme court justice in a long time, then!

[zgreggz83]

No, swing vote was Kennedy. All others were pretty much known.

[djarch999]

Let me explain: Bush won the initial count and the 1st automatic recount of votes in Florida. He was never behind in any of the counts. It was only after Al Gore (yes, he started the lawsuits) convinced the Florida state courts to mandate repeated, unequal recounts that Bush appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court simply told the Florida Supreme Court to uphold their own state laws, including the deadlines by which the votes had to be counted and certified. End of Story.

[Frankieireland]

The US SC made a political decision.the sc justices had a political view and came to the case with their decisions made.they then tried desperately to find legal reasons for this.They stated that it was not a precedent which makes no sense in a common law jurisdiction. law is politics especially in the home of capitalism.

[ieodksnw787]

S. Ct. is the only court not bound by precedential authority.

[Frankieireland]

I'm not saying that it was bound by a previous precedent, what i'm saying is that when it was handing down judgement it stated that this decision was not precedent to other courts. I'm not talking about whether the SC would be bound by it in future. Seems inconsequential now. history. something to tell the grandkids. sad though. depressing decision. SC has since gone some way toward redeeming itself.

[ieodksnw787]

every single S. Ct. is precedent to all lower courts. In this case, it would be binding on the Federal district and circuit courts.

for the record, I think the opinion was corrupt and the most politically motivated opinion since the Roosevelt administration.

[Frankieireland]

We're in agreement to a certain point, I haven't looked at this decision for 2 years but my understanding is that the reasoning of the conservative majority was a step back from stare decisis and so instead of(as you rightly point out) being a SC decision it would be binding precedent on the federal district and circuit crts. Bush v Gore was, if we believe the reasoning of the majority(which is a big 'if') a move away from this age old legal more.

[ieodksnw787]

I think it was political on both sides. My beef is that all of a sudden, Scalia and Thomas are big Equal Protection advocates and Souter and Breyer are big on states' rights.

[Frankieireland]

I'd agree with that. I tend to ignore the fact that the minority were also politically driven. A bad day for law is the best conclusion.

[ieodksnw787]

yeah, add to that the fact that stopping the recount was far from the best remedy for an Equal Protection violation. If it was truly an Equal Protection issue, it could only be redressed by a complete and equal recount.

I don't believe that Bush had standing in the first place.

As much as they'd have you believe otherwise, the Supreme Court has always been a politically driven and self-interested institution. Schoolchildren all know about Brown v. Board, but aren't taught Brown II

[phillipmarch22]

The United States Supreme Court took the 14th amendment and twisted it and tweaked it so radically it is not even funny. Scalia even had the balls to say that their decision should not be used as presednet in future cases. Scalia tops the list in my book as the most corrupt court justice in my generation. I heard him give a speech and during Q & A, if someone asked a question that put him on the spot, he joked and danced around the question. He is an asshole in the 1st degree!

[phillipmarch22]

I might have written this to you already, (I have been blogging alot), but Scalia wrote in his opinion that he bush v. Gore decision should not be used as presedent in future election decisions. Ummmmm!

[phillipmarch22]

Amen ieodksnw787 in regard to bush v. Gore. Travesty of the highest order. So many people lost faith is the Supreme Court over their decision, I certainly did.

Right up till recently, (re: campaign donations and saying that corporations are people and to tie that in to a 1st amendment issue is mind blowinng!) Anyone with half a brain knows that the GOP backs big business, they don't give a shit about the small self employed regular Joe trying to make a living. Truly unbelievable!

[dgagnon313]

I was there. If only you knew.

[zgreggz83]

Let me really explain: The machine recounts were not done in 18 counties totaling 1.58 million votes. Against Secretary of State and Division of Election procedures, these counties did not reprocess the ballots. All Gore didn't "convince" the courts; they ruled based on Florida State Law which said the standard was the intent of the voter as determined by each canvassing board.

[zgreggz83]

And then Kathryn Harris sent cronies down to the counties to improperly influence the boards to count to a more conservative standard, and Baker engineered protests to stop the recount in Miami-Dade. Bush stole the election. End of story.

[JoinedJustToSayThis]

A 5 minute speech without one single piece of evidence or proven fact.

Is this to be considered an "intelligent" argument?

[mikelowry5]

The speech laster longer than five minutes. The present clip shows only the first five minutes.

[billybillfat]

In Bush v. Gore, the equal protection argument was laughably flawed - it is an irrelevant distraction to note that "wow, the conservatives were making an equal protection argument", and it is simply stupid to follow it up with "and gee, the liberal justices were making a states' rights argument - I guess this means it was all political"!!! Jan Crawford Greenburg is a lightweight, and her book was not very good.

[2ndPistonHonda]

do you not agree that if a state holds a recount, that the entire state should be recounted and not select counties?

[zgreggz83]

Yes, that is what the Florida State Supreme Court ruled. Gore did not do so because Florida does not have a mechanism to ask for a statewide recount; rather, you need to request of each of the 67 counties individually. With Kathryn Harris as Secretary of State Gore did not have time to ask for a recount of all the counties.

[icarusinbrazil]

Is this woman directly related to Katherine Harris?

[gibbsale]

This simply confirms that Greenburg is a conservative lapdog. She talks about the "liberal justices" accepting a states rights argument. No mention of the lack of citation in the majority opinion, or that the Court confined their decision to the facts of Bush v. Gore. No mention of the fact that Stevens and Souter were Republican appointments. No mention of the fact that the equal protection argument was broad even by liberal standards.

[markotraco]

The equal protection decision was 7-2.

[zgreggz83]

But the remedy, the crucial element. was 5-4. And she just said the only reason Souter and Breyer voted for equal protection was to try and appease Kennedy to vote to remand to the Florida State Supreme Court.

[phillipmarch22]

Con't from last comment:

Out of 106 capital murder trials, he only lost one. Again, he knows the law. He speaks in legalese alot, so it helps to have a law background.

Remember the Franken v. ? in Minnesota. The votes were extremely close. The way they worked that out is EXACTLY how they should have worked bush v. Gore out.

[zgreggz83]

Could you expand on this comment? Not sure follow...who knows the law? If talking about Gibbsale, he has some credible points, but perhaps she mentioned these later in the speech. This is just an excerpt. I do give her credit for not solely focusing on the apparently contradictory opinions of the majority five, but also the apparently contradictory opinions of Souter and Breyer. Often overlooked if you wish to make this argument.

[phillipmarch22]

I give her credit too, in this exerpt she sounded un-biased. Again, I think Florida could have worked this out with the US Supreme Court getting involved. I do hope you read "None Dare Call It Treason by Vincent Bugulsi. He wrote an article in The Nation Magazine and he also wrote a book. Go to the Nation website to find the article.

[zgreggz83]

All nine justices had concerns over the actions of the Florida Supreme Court, noting that although the US Supreme Court generally deferred to the state court's interpretation of a state statute, both the US constitution and federal government law also governed the conduct of presidential elections...a fact often overlooked by critics of the US Supreme Court taking the case.

I was commenting regarding the poster who made the 7-2 comment.

[phillipmarch22]

In my opinion, the whole debacle in 2000 regarding bush v. Gore could have been handled the exact same way the Franken v. Coleman case was handled. bush is the one that stepped in and stopped the undervotes. The 2000 Presidental race was one of the greatest tragedies in the Presidental race history of our nation. As for OJ, he is a quilty as he day is long. The jury didn't know the difference DNA and PTA. (I went to school with Nichole Brown Simpson in Dana Point CA, she was my friend)

[mikelowry5]

You have to take into account that the Court was operating by an extremely compressed schedule. This could help to explain the lack of citations. I do not understand how her presentation would have been more informative if she had mentioned that Stevens and Souter were Republican appointees.

[FallenTabris]

Informative. thank you.