Day of Supreme Drama Nation's Highest Court Questions Lawyers for Bush, Gore on Why It Should Act on Florida

By Friedland, Bruce I. | The Florida Times Union, December 2, 2000 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Day of Supreme Drama Nation's Highest Court Questions Lawyers for Bush, Gore on Why It Should Act on Florida

Friedland, Bruce I., The Florida Times Union

WASHINGTON -- As the fight over the presidential election spilled into the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday, justices peppered attorneys with questions touching on most legal aspects of the Florida dispute -- including why they should be involved.

"We're looking for a federal issue here," said Justice Anthony Kennedy, less than 10 minutes after Republican George W. Bush's attorney, Theodore Olson, began speaking. Olson found himself quickly engulfed in a barrage of questions.

"Why should the federal judiciary be interfering in what seems to be a very carefully thought-out scheme" for settling elections in Florida, Justice David Souter asked.

Laurence Tribe, a lawyer representing Democratic candidate Al Gore, underwent tough questioning, too.

In a 90-minute hearing, the nine-member court considered whether the Florida Supreme Court overstepped its authority in extending the deadline for certifying a winner to include results of hand recounts requested by Gore. The extra time narrowed Bush's lead from 930 votes to 537.

On Sunday, Bush was certified the winner in Florida, a decision Gore is contesting in state court.

Most of the Supreme Court justices expressed doubts yesterday about the Bush camp's contention that the case involved a matter of federal law, but some appeared to take seriously the possibility that Florida's high court may have gone too far.

"Certainly the date changed," Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said. "It just does look like a very dramatic change made by the Florida court."

Wading into the ocean of litigation, the justices also asked about the requirements of a manual recount, the limits of official discretion and the degree to which the case before them even mattered since Bush's victory had already been certified.

The justices -- all of whom waded into the argument with the exception of Justice Clarence Thomas -- appeared skeptical of many of the claims asserted by both sides.

Attorneys for Bush argued that the state Supreme Court had changed the rules of the election after Nov. 7. Such a shift violated federal law, they said.

"What the Florida Supreme Court did was to rewrite the statutes," Olson told the justices.

Tribe, the Gore attorney, asserted that the Florida court had done "nothing extraordinary" in rendering its decision, taking the judicial steps required to reconcile conflicting statutes at issue in the case.

Furthermore, Tribe argued, federal law leaves it up to the institutions of state government to resolve the conflict.

The legal battle before the nation's highest court resulted from a provision of Florida law requiring the secretary of state to certify county vote results seven days after the election. Another provision of Florida election law allows candidates to ask counties for manual recounts.

Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris maintained that the seven-day deadline was firm and that she was not obligated to accept any amended vote tallies forwarded to her later -- after hand counts were complete.

On Nov. 17, the Florida Supreme Court blocked Harris from certifying the election results the next day, after overseas absentee ballots were counted.

In a subsequent opinion, the state court ruled Harris had to accept manual recounts by 5 p.m. Nov. 26, a deadline selected to balance further challenges to the election and a federal deadline of Dec. 12 for states to select their presidential electors.

In the wake of that decision, Bush and his attorneys denounced the Florida court's action as a flagrant instance of improper judicial activism. They maintain that in tossing out the seven-day deadline, the opinion of the Florida judges improperly supplanted the will of the Legislature.

At yesterday's hearing, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg appeared to view the Florida court's action as simply a reconciliation of conflicting statutes.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Day of Supreme Drama Nation's Highest Court Questions Lawyers for Bush, Gore on Why It Should Act on Florida


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?