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.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (71561)11/12/2000 5:14:30 PM
From: Mr. Palau  Read Replies (1) of 769667
 
It will be interesting to see whether the federal court applies strict scrutiny. I bet not. In order for an election law to be subject to strict scrutiny, the law must substantially burden the right to vote, which they seldom find. The Supreme Court recently held that a Hawaii law that completely banned write in voting was not subject to strict scrutiny. In any event, the equal protection clause asks whether the challenge law treats similarly situated persons differently. Here, the recount statute, like the recount statute recently signed by the Governor of Texas, treats simiarly situated persons similarly: It provides to any voter or candidate the right to request a recount within 72 hours of the election. I dont see the current US Supreme Court, with its distinct trend toward federalism, embracing the idea that federal courts are the right place to litigate the operation of state election laws. Now, if you had a more liberal Supreme Court, Bush might have a chance.
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