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
