Election 2004: Vote Early and OftenNovember 25, 2000
Sunday, October 31, 2004, 03:33 PM
NYT Headline: "U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Florida Recount Case".
Now, why would they want to hear it? To affirm the lower court's opinion in glowing terms? Well, then, they could have just left well enough alone and denied cert.
The court added an additional question for briefing, other than those raised by the Bush campaign:
"What would be the consequences of this court's finding that the decision of the Supreme Court of Florida does not comply with Title 3 United States Code, Section 5?"
Most comentators were surprised by the decision to take the case. But they quickly found a rationale. "Justices May See Task As Calming the Storm", according to the headline.
"What the court is trying to do," said Bruce Ackerman, a professor of law and politics at Yale University, "is to keep the fundamental issues legal, to be resolved by legal tribunals." And, "whichever way they go, this will reassure both sides," he said.
He was the liberal commentator quoted for the article.
The conservative commentator said much the same thing.
In other developments, the Gore campaign planned to contest the Palm Beach County recount because they didn't count dimpled chads, the Florida Legislature planned to intervene on behalf of the Bush campaign in the case that the U.S. Supreme Court just agreed to hear, Bush lawyers argued in state court that over a dozen counties should reinstate absentee ballots that had been disqualified for unpostmarked ballots or ballots from unregistered voters (!), and Dick Cheney got out of the hospital after being treated for a mild heart attack.
§
