Back essay by Carl Pridemore
Breyer and Souter (writing separately) agreed with the per
curiam holding that the Florida Court's recount scheme violated
the Equal Protection Clause, but they dissented with respect to
the remedy, believing that a constitutional recount could be
fashioned. Time is insubstantial when constitutional rights are at
stake.
Ginsburg and Stevens (writing separately) argued that for
reasons of federalism, the Florida Supreme Court's decision ought
to be respected. Moreover, the Florida decision was fundamentally
right; the Constitution requires that every vote be counted.
Well, there it is. Once again, facts trump opinions. I know my essay
can’t compete with your bumper stickers. Remember, illegal and
unpopular are not synonymous. Do you believe in due process? Do you
think your legal vote should count less than an illegal vote? Still
think, as Democrats like to say, Bush was selected, not elected? One
last thought. You do know, there were several media outlets that
received permission from the courts, to recount the votes? Go to
these links and let me know what you think.
USA
Today Recount
Brooks Brothers Riot
