SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM)
QCOM 172.24+0.9%12:52 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Roadkill who wrote (87057)11/12/2000 12:08:46 PM
From: FaultLine  Read Replies (1) of 152472
 
The Newshour with Jim Lehrer on Friday had an outstanding panel discussion of the election issues. I wish all of you could have seen it. Among the items discussed was the topic of the role of the courts in this situation. All of the panelists strongly agreed that, due to the separation of powers, and contrary to current popular opinion, the courts have always; been very reluctant to adjudicate election issues other than those involving election fraud. At every level, the courts have demonstrated that they believe that the election process is an executive branch process with rules for the orderly conduct of elections being a presidential or gubernatorial responsibility. The courts almost never overturn an election. The discussants also stated that Federal courts are extremely reluctant to get involved in state election issues.

In this context it is easy from me to imagine the Federal judge thinking that this case. clearly in uncharted territory, is fraught with Constitutional considerations and, in fact, might be more appropriately handled by the Florida State Supreme Court. Either way the judge rules though sets precedent for the future - a very serious responsibility indeed, one actually affecting the National vs. States' rights balance I believe.

The Federal Judge's Monday schedule is very interesting because his ruling may not be necessary at all - a common technique by the judiciary to be conservative by simply avoiding the setting of new and possibly very controversial precedent. This cautious approach seems very appropriate in this difficult Separation of Executive vs. Judicial Powers and Federal Separation of National vs. State Powers situation.

--FaultLine
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News