Tuesday, October 17, 2006

You Don't Say?

Food for thought from today's Political Process class.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000)


Per Curiam: A desire for speed is not a general excuse for ignoring equal protection guarantees.

(...332 words later...)

Per Curiam: Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Justice Stevens (dissenting): Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.

Justice Ginsburg (dissenting): In sum, the Court's conclusion that a constitutionally adequate recount is impractical is a prophecy the Court's own judgment will not allow to be tested. Such an untested prophecy should not decide the Presidency of the United States.

Justice Breyer (dissenting): The majority's reasoning would seem to invalidate any state provision for a manual recount of individual counties in a statewide election.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home