> And it was 7 Justices who overruled the Fla Supreme Courts > decision (The 5-4 vote was for remanding it back to them).
No, the 5-4 decision was the one that really mattered. The 7-2 decision said that the statewide recount violated equal protection clauses because the various localities were interpreting the voters' intent differently. That decision by itself would not have stopped a recount by a different method. The 5-4 decision effectively ended *any* recount by stating that December 12 was the deadline and that no constitutionally valid recount could be completed by that date (and, as my daughter would say, "You know this, how?") The decision is very difficult to understand absent political motivation. Reading the decision and the dissents is instructive--the logic in the dissents is far more compelling than that in the decision. Breyer is very blunt: "The Court was wrong to take this case. It was wrong to grant a stay. It should now vacate that stay and permit the Florida Supreme Court to decide whether the recount should resume. The political implications of this case for the country are momentous. But the federal legal questions presented, with one exception, are insubstantial." And Stevens even more so: "What must underlie petitioners' entire federal assault on the Florida election procedures is an unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed. Otherwise, their position is wholly without merit. The endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land. It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. 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." That's a pretty stunning paragraph to appear in a Supreme Court decision. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
