How Bush Won

By Magarian, Gregory P. | Commonweal, November 8, 2002 | Go to article overview

How Bush Won


Magarian, Gregory P., Commonweal


A Badly Flawed Election Debating Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court, and American Democracy Edited by Ronald Dworkin New Press, $26.95, 352 pp.

The Longest Night Polemics and Perspectives on Election 2000 Edited by Arthur J. Jacobson and Michel Rosenfeld University of California Press, $24.95, 408 pp.

The Vote Bush, Gore, and the Supreme Court Edited by Cass R. Sunstein and Richard A. Epstein University of Chicago Press, $18, 266 pp.

September 11, 2001, has caused many Americans to forget December 12, 2000. On that date, the United States Supreme Court handed down its decision in Bush v. Gore, which effectively ended the bizarre 2000 presidential election and inspired angry denunciation from many quarters. The recent anniversary of the September 11 atrocities demonstrated that those awful events still ring too freshly in our minds for most of us to envision how they will change American society over time. Three new volumes of thoughtful academic commentary on Bush v. Gore similarly demonstrate that more time must pass to clarify that decision's long-term implications for electoral practices, constitutional law, and the reputation of our highest court.

On November 8, 2000, Americans awoke to the news that the presidential election remained too close to call in the decisive state of Florida. The next month brought incessant political and legal wrangling over recounts. On December 8, a closely divided Florida Supreme Court held that a statewide manual recount of "undervotes"--ballots discarded in the initial count--was proper under Florida election statutes. The state court instructed county election officials to include in their final counts any ballot that indicated a voter's "clear intent." George W. Bush responded to this legal victory for Al Gore by asking the United States Supreme Court to reverse the Florida court's decision. Legal experts thought the request doomed, because deciding the case would require the Supreme Court to second-guess a state court's interpretation of state law and to interfere in the political process. At worst, the experts predicted, the dead heat in Florida would trigger a detailed set of procedures set forth in the United States Constitution for resolving uncertain presidential elections.

The U.S. Supreme Court stunned the experts by agreeing to hear the Bush appeal. Even more surprisingly, the Court ordered an immediate stay of the Florida recounts, halting all efforts toward increased accuracy. The decision pitted the Court's five most conservative members against the four most liberal justices. The same five-justice majority then reversed the Florida court's decision, holding in an unusual, unsigned per curiam opinion that the state court's "clear intent" standard for the manual recounts violated the federal Constitution's guarantee of "equal protection of the laws." The Court's three most conservative members--Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas--argued in a concurring opinion that the Florida court also had interpreted preexisting Florida election statutes so implausibly as to violate another constitutional provision that empowered state legislatures to determine the manner of choosing presidential electors. The five-justice majority concluded that no time remained to remand the case to the Florida court to repair the equal protection flaw, because a federal law allowed congressional challenges to Florida's slate of electors if the slate was not finalized by December 12--the very day the Court announced its decision. The next day, December 13, Vice President Gore conceded the election.

Reading the essays in these volumes leaves no doubt that the Supreme Court majority decided Bush v. Gore incorrectly. To begin with, every lawyer knows that a reviewing court may stay a lower court's judgment pending appeal only if execution of the judgment would cause the appellant "irreparable harm.

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.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

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

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

How Bush Won
Settings

Settings

Typeface
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?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

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

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

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.