Lawrence S. Wrightsman
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- April 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780195306040
- eISBN:
- 9780199894093
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306040.003.0007
- Subject:
- Psychology, Forensic Psychology
The decision by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore will forever be mentioned as one of its most significant. On December 12, 2000, it curtailed the recounting of votes in Florida, meaning that George ...
More
The decision by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore will forever be mentioned as one of its most significant. On December 12, 2000, it curtailed the recounting of votes in Florida, meaning that George W. Bush had been elected president. This chapter begins with a chronology of events leading up to the decision. It then summarizes the opinion, describes criticisms and other reactions, and seeks to explain the outcome from the different models of decision-making described earlier in this book.Less
The decision by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore will forever be mentioned as one of its most significant. On December 12, 2000, it curtailed the recounting of votes in Florida, meaning that George W. Bush had been elected president. This chapter begins with a chronology of events leading up to the decision. It then summarizes the opinion, describes criticisms and other reactions, and seeks to explain the outcome from the different models of decision-making described earlier in this book.
G. Edward White
- Published in print:
- 2019
- Published Online:
- May 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780190634940
- eISBN:
- 9780190940348
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190634940.003.0013
- Subject:
- Law, Legal History, Constitutional and Administrative Law
Bush v. Gore, when it was first decided, was widely criticized by commentators as an unjustifiable intervention by the Supreme Court into the Florida electoral process in the 2000 presidential ...
More
Bush v. Gore, when it was first decided, was widely criticized by commentators as an unjustifiable intervention by the Supreme Court into the Florida electoral process in the 2000 presidential election. Two decades later, the case seems much less significant, and arguably less controversial. The chapter traces the “journey” of the Supreme Court toward Bush v. Gore, which consisted of a combination of its abandoning the “political question” doctrine, which posited that the Court should avoid reviewing legislative decisions affecting the redistricting of voters in political elections, and the unique circumstances of the 2000 presidential election in Florida and Florida’s electoral processes.Less
Bush v. Gore, when it was first decided, was widely criticized by commentators as an unjustifiable intervention by the Supreme Court into the Florida electoral process in the 2000 presidential election. Two decades later, the case seems much less significant, and arguably less controversial. The chapter traces the “journey” of the Supreme Court toward Bush v. Gore, which consisted of a combination of its abandoning the “political question” doctrine, which posited that the Court should avoid reviewing legislative decisions affecting the redistricting of voters in political elections, and the unique circumstances of the 2000 presidential election in Florida and Florida’s electoral processes.
Manoj Mate and Matthew Wright
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195329414
- eISBN:
- 9780199851720
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195329414.003.0015
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
The Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore (2000) may have decided the disputed 2000 presidential election, but in its immediate aftermath, the controversy lived on in the divisions the case caused ...
More
The Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore (2000) may have decided the disputed 2000 presidential election, but in its immediate aftermath, the controversy lived on in the divisions the case caused in public opinion toward the Court itself. This chapter follows a long line of scholarship that measures the public's trust, confidence, and support for the Court in the wake of controversial decisions. The chapter analyzes data from the 2000 and 2004 National Annenberg Election Studies, which provide various measures of support for the Supreme Court both immediately before and after Bush v. Gore. The findings of short-term polarization immediately following Bush v. Gore, which recedes completely four years later, attests to the resiliency of popular attitudes toward the Court even in the face of its most “legitimacy-threatening” decisions.Less
The Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore (2000) may have decided the disputed 2000 presidential election, but in its immediate aftermath, the controversy lived on in the divisions the case caused in public opinion toward the Court itself. This chapter follows a long line of scholarship that measures the public's trust, confidence, and support for the Court in the wake of controversial decisions. The chapter analyzes data from the 2000 and 2004 National Annenberg Election Studies, which provide various measures of support for the Supreme Court both immediately before and after Bush v. Gore. The findings of short-term polarization immediately following Bush v. Gore, which recedes completely four years later, attests to the resiliency of popular attitudes toward the Court even in the face of its most “legitimacy-threatening” decisions.
Jed Rubenfeld
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- October 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780300093797
- eISBN:
- 9780300127003
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Yale University Press
- DOI:
- 10.12987/yale/9780300093797.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
This chapter addresses Bush v. Gore strictly from a legal point of view. It discusses why Bush v. Gore differs profoundly from cases like Roe or Plessy. It argues that the Bush v. Gore majority ...
More
This chapter addresses Bush v. Gore strictly from a legal point of view. It discusses why Bush v. Gore differs profoundly from cases like Roe or Plessy. It argues that the Bush v. Gore majority rendered an enormously illegitimate decision. It further suggests that other decisions rendered by the majority can no longer be taken seriously as matters of constitutional principle.Less
This chapter addresses Bush v. Gore strictly from a legal point of view. It discusses why Bush v. Gore differs profoundly from cases like Roe or Plessy. It argues that the Bush v. Gore majority rendered an enormously illegitimate decision. It further suggests that other decisions rendered by the majority can no longer be taken seriously as matters of constitutional principle.
Cuido Calabresi
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- October 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780300093797
- eISBN:
- 9780300127003
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Yale University Press
- DOI:
- 10.12987/yale/9780300093797.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
This chapter discusses the rather complex but crucial role of principle in judicial decision making. It begins with a sketch of three possible opinions that might have resolved Bush v. Gore in a ...
More
This chapter discusses the rather complex but crucial role of principle in judicial decision making. It begins with a sketch of three possible opinions that might have resolved Bush v. Gore in a principled way—one favoring Bush, one Gore, and one indeterminate at the time the Supreme Court decided the case. It is argued that the Court failed to take any of these models seriously, awarding the presidency without committing itself to any coherent constitutional principle. While unprincipled decision making may sometimes be acceptable, even wise, the problem confronting the Court did not remotely authorize such a breach with established judicial norms. It is only by committing themselves even more firmly to legal principle that federal judges may ultimately undo the harm caused by the aberrational character of the Supreme Court's decision.Less
This chapter discusses the rather complex but crucial role of principle in judicial decision making. It begins with a sketch of three possible opinions that might have resolved Bush v. Gore in a principled way—one favoring Bush, one Gore, and one indeterminate at the time the Supreme Court decided the case. It is argued that the Court failed to take any of these models seriously, awarding the presidency without committing itself to any coherent constitutional principle. While unprincipled decision making may sometimes be acceptable, even wise, the problem confronting the Court did not remotely authorize such a breach with established judicial norms. It is only by committing themselves even more firmly to legal principle that federal judges may ultimately undo the harm caused by the aberrational character of the Supreme Court's decision.
Lackland H. Bloom
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- April 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199765881
- eISBN:
- 9780199366903
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199765881.003.0021
- Subject:
- Law, Legal History
Bush v Gore brought settlement to the dispute over the vote count in Florida in the presidential election of 2000 which in turn determined that George W. Bush would become the next President. A case ...
More
Bush v Gore brought settlement to the dispute over the vote count in Florida in the presidential election of 2000 which in turn determined that George W. Bush would become the next President. A case in which the Court determines the outcome of a presidential election is indisputably a great case. The chapter discusses the complicated series of events that placed the case of Bush v Gore before the Supreme Court. It attempts to explain why the Court did not hesitate to hear the case even though it presented a significant risk to the Court’s credibility and reputation. The chapter explores both the Equal Protection rationale relied upon by seven justices as well as the Article II theory supported by the Rehnquist plurality. Finally the chapter addresses the most controversial aspect of the case—why did the Court end the recount procedure immediately as opposed to giving Florida officials one final opportunity to recount the votes?Less
Bush v Gore brought settlement to the dispute over the vote count in Florida in the presidential election of 2000 which in turn determined that George W. Bush would become the next President. A case in which the Court determines the outcome of a presidential election is indisputably a great case. The chapter discusses the complicated series of events that placed the case of Bush v Gore before the Supreme Court. It attempts to explain why the Court did not hesitate to hear the case even though it presented a significant risk to the Court’s credibility and reputation. The chapter explores both the Equal Protection rationale relied upon by seven justices as well as the Article II theory supported by the Rehnquist plurality. Finally the chapter addresses the most controversial aspect of the case—why did the Court end the recount procedure immediately as opposed to giving Florida officials one final opportunity to recount the votes?
Charles Fried
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- October 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780300093797
- eISBN:
- 9780300127003
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Yale University Press
- DOI:
- 10.12987/yale/9780300093797.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
This chapter discusses the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore. It argues that the case was correctly decided. It attempts to explain the reasonableness of Bush v. Gore, and its rightful place ...
More
This chapter discusses the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore. It argues that the case was correctly decided. It attempts to explain the reasonableness of Bush v. Gore, and its rightful place among the large number of important Supreme Court decisions on which reasonable minds might differ.Less
This chapter discusses the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore. It argues that the case was correctly decided. It attempts to explain the reasonableness of Bush v. Gore, and its rightful place among the large number of important Supreme Court decisions on which reasonable minds might differ.
Brian K. Pinaire
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- June 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780804757249
- eISBN:
- 9780804779609
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Stanford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.11126/stanford/9780804757249.001.0001
- Subject:
- Law, Constitutional and Administrative Law
Bush v. Gore brought to the public's attention the significance of election law and the United States Supreme Court's role in structuring the rules that govern how campaigns and elections function in ...
More
Bush v. Gore brought to the public's attention the significance of election law and the United States Supreme Court's role in structuring the rules that govern how campaigns and elections function in America. This book examines one expanding domain within this larger legal context: freedom of speech in the political process, or electoral speech law. Specifically, the author examines the Court's evolving conceptions of free speech in the electoral process and then traces the consequences of various debates and determinations from the post-World War II era to the present. In his analysis of the broad range of cases from this period, supplemented by four recent case study investigations, he explores competing visions of electoral expression in the marketplace of ideas, various methods for analyzing speech dilemmas, the multiple influences that shape the justices' notions of both the potential for and privileged status of electoral communication, and the ultimate implications of these Court rulings for American democracy.Less
Bush v. Gore brought to the public's attention the significance of election law and the United States Supreme Court's role in structuring the rules that govern how campaigns and elections function in America. This book examines one expanding domain within this larger legal context: freedom of speech in the political process, or electoral speech law. Specifically, the author examines the Court's evolving conceptions of free speech in the electoral process and then traces the consequences of various debates and determinations from the post-World War II era to the present. In his analysis of the broad range of cases from this period, supplemented by four recent case study investigations, he explores competing visions of electoral expression in the marketplace of ideas, various methods for analyzing speech dilemmas, the multiple influences that shape the justices' notions of both the potential for and privileged status of electoral communication, and the ultimate implications of these Court rulings for American democracy.
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- March 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780226428840
- eISBN:
- 9780226428864
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226428864.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
The liberal and Democratic support for the Court took a temporary hit from Bush v. Gore, but it quickly rebounded and is likely to remain strong over the long term, in large part because Justices ...
More
The liberal and Democratic support for the Court took a temporary hit from Bush v. Gore, but it quickly rebounded and is likely to remain strong over the long term, in large part because Justices O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy have preserved so much of the Warren Court legacy. The nation's ever-firmer commitment to rights-based activism has undermined the continued conservative calls for judicial restraint in contexts such as abortion and gay rights. Contemporary judicial conservatism is a rights-based conservatism. When the conservative justices have asserted their own power, they have generally justified such assertions on either originalist or rights-protecting grounds. If Bush v. Gore merits criticism, it is because it reflected an imperious vision of the judicial role that has characterized the current Court more generally, and not solely because it was a partisan decision in a particular case.Less
The liberal and Democratic support for the Court took a temporary hit from Bush v. Gore, but it quickly rebounded and is likely to remain strong over the long term, in large part because Justices O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy have preserved so much of the Warren Court legacy. The nation's ever-firmer commitment to rights-based activism has undermined the continued conservative calls for judicial restraint in contexts such as abortion and gay rights. Contemporary judicial conservatism is a rights-based conservatism. When the conservative justices have asserted their own power, they have generally justified such assertions on either originalist or rights-protecting grounds. If Bush v. Gore merits criticism, it is because it reflected an imperious vision of the judicial role that has characterized the current Court more generally, and not solely because it was a partisan decision in a particular case.
Harold H. Bruff
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- September 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780226211107
- eISBN:
- 9780226211244
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226211244.003.0014
- Subject:
- Law, Constitutional and Administrative Law
George W. Bush became president when the Supreme Court resolved an election dispute in his favor in Bush v. Gore. His Vice President, Dick Cheney, became the most powerful one in American history. ...
More
George W. Bush became president when the Supreme Court resolved an election dispute in his favor in Bush v. Gore. His Vice President, Dick Cheney, became the most powerful one in American history. After the 9/11 attacks, Bush declared a war on terror and conducted it aggressively. He obtained congressional authorization in the AUMF to use force against al Qaeda. He detained suspects, suspended the Geneva Conventions, conducted warrantless electronic surveillance, and authorized harsh interrogation methods. He asserted exclusive executive power that Congress could not control, and emphasized secrecy. He used signing statements extensively. The Supreme Court and Congress eventually constrained his unilateral initiatives. He obtained authorization for a war against Iraq based on false information. He neglected his faithful execution duty regarding the Iraq occupation and the reaction to Hurricane Katrina.Less
George W. Bush became president when the Supreme Court resolved an election dispute in his favor in Bush v. Gore. His Vice President, Dick Cheney, became the most powerful one in American history. After the 9/11 attacks, Bush declared a war on terror and conducted it aggressively. He obtained congressional authorization in the AUMF to use force against al Qaeda. He detained suspects, suspended the Geneva Conventions, conducted warrantless electronic surveillance, and authorized harsh interrogation methods. He asserted exclusive executive power that Congress could not control, and emphasized secrecy. He used signing statements extensively. The Supreme Court and Congress eventually constrained his unilateral initiatives. He obtained authorization for a war against Iraq based on false information. He neglected his faithful execution duty regarding the Iraq occupation and the reaction to Hurricane Katrina.
Peter Margulies
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- March 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780814795590
- eISBN:
- 9780814759608
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- NYU Press
- DOI:
- 10.18574/nyu/9780814795590.003.0007
- Subject:
- Law, Constitutional and Administrative Law
This chapter examines the Bush administration's election-related legal detours, with partticular emphasis on its attempts to pressure prosecutors such as David Iglesias, United States Attorney for ...
More
This chapter examines the Bush administration's election-related legal detours, with partticular emphasis on its attempts to pressure prosecutors such as David Iglesias, United States Attorney for New Mexico, to ignore long-standing rules and traditions insulating federal prosecutors from politics. It also considers the administration's disregard for the value of prosecutorial discretion and discusses the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore, which addressed vote dilution and vote suppression concerns. Finally, it analyzes the Bush administration's bias in the prosecution of public officials and how the Department of Justice carried out political prosecutions within a short period of time prior to elections.Less
This chapter examines the Bush administration's election-related legal detours, with partticular emphasis on its attempts to pressure prosecutors such as David Iglesias, United States Attorney for New Mexico, to ignore long-standing rules and traditions insulating federal prosecutors from politics. It also considers the administration's disregard for the value of prosecutorial discretion and discusses the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore, which addressed vote dilution and vote suppression concerns. Finally, it analyzes the Bush administration's bias in the prosecution of public officials and how the Department of Justice carried out political prosecutions within a short period of time prior to elections.
James M. Denham
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- January 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780813060491
- eISBN:
- 9780813050638
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University Press of Florida
- DOI:
- 10.5744/florida/9780813060491.003.0017
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
This chapter begins with the confused presidential election of 2000 and disputed vote totals in Florida. Some litigation in the Middle District involving counting of the votes is included in the ...
More
This chapter begins with the confused presidential election of 2000 and disputed vote totals in Florida. Some litigation in the Middle District involving counting of the votes is included in the chapter. George W. Bush’s justice department is introduced. The September 11 terrorist attacks and their impact on federal law enforcement is discussed. The Bush Administration’s reaction to the attacks, its subsequent “War on Terror,” the passage of the Patriot Act, and the War in Iraq had a transformative effect on American society and the Middle District of Florida. The Middle District’s reaction to the attack and the heightened security measures are covered. Extensive coverage of the U.S. Attorney’s office is included. The chapter then turns to the unhealthy conditions (sick courthouse syndrome) in the various courthouses. The construction of a new courthouse in Orlando is discussed. A number of corruption cases are discussed, including the Jacksonville Police Department and several other agencies receiving federal funds are chronicled. The chapter concludes with the implementation of the Case Management/Electronic Case Files System (CM/ECF) by the Middle district clerk’s office as well as how the system functioned during the four hurricanes that swept through the district in 2004.Less
This chapter begins with the confused presidential election of 2000 and disputed vote totals in Florida. Some litigation in the Middle District involving counting of the votes is included in the chapter. George W. Bush’s justice department is introduced. The September 11 terrorist attacks and their impact on federal law enforcement is discussed. The Bush Administration’s reaction to the attacks, its subsequent “War on Terror,” the passage of the Patriot Act, and the War in Iraq had a transformative effect on American society and the Middle District of Florida. The Middle District’s reaction to the attack and the heightened security measures are covered. Extensive coverage of the U.S. Attorney’s office is included. The chapter then turns to the unhealthy conditions (sick courthouse syndrome) in the various courthouses. The construction of a new courthouse in Orlando is discussed. A number of corruption cases are discussed, including the Jacksonville Police Department and several other agencies receiving federal funds are chronicled. The chapter concludes with the implementation of the Case Management/Electronic Case Files System (CM/ECF) by the Middle district clerk’s office as well as how the system functioned during the four hurricanes that swept through the district in 2004.
Peter Margulies
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- March 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780814795590
- eISBN:
- 9780814759608
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- NYU Press
- DOI:
- 10.18574/nyu/9780814795590.003.0007
- Subject:
- Law, Constitutional and Administrative Law
This chapter examines the Bush administration's election-related legal detours, with partticular emphasis on its attempts to pressure prosecutors such as David Iglesias, United States Attorney for ...
More
This chapter examines the Bush administration's election-related legal detours, with partticular emphasis on its attempts to pressure prosecutors such as David Iglesias, United States Attorney for New Mexico, to ignore long-standing rules and traditions insulating federal prosecutors from politics. It also considers the administration's disregard for the value of prosecutorial discretion and discusses the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore, which addressed vote dilution and vote suppression concerns. Finally, it analyzes the Bush administration's bias in the prosecution of public officials and how the Department of Justice carried out political prosecutions within a short period of time prior to elections.Less
This chapter examines the Bush administration's election-related legal detours, with partticular emphasis on its attempts to pressure prosecutors such as David Iglesias, United States Attorney for New Mexico, to ignore long-standing rules and traditions insulating federal prosecutors from politics. It also considers the administration's disregard for the value of prosecutorial discretion and discusses the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore, which addressed vote dilution and vote suppression concerns. Finally, it analyzes the Bush administration's bias in the prosecution of public officials and how the Department of Justice carried out political prosecutions within a short period of time prior to elections.
