To all citizens of good faith, here is my 2 cents on where we stand:
Judge Lewis (a Dem, I believe) ruled (correctly, I believe) that Sec'y of State Harris did not act arbitrarily (or, heaven forbid, capriciously) when she gave her reasons for rejecting the hand counts in 4 counties. I think this is a good 3 steps forward for George and a good 6 steps back for Al, but the Democrats still have a chance (the FL Supreme Ct, and the US Supreme Ct.).
Neither of these courts should have the chutzpah, or bad judgment, to mess with the two lower decisions (Sec'y State and Circuit Ct.), because the standard of appeal from the Circuit Ct.'s decision would have to be that, BY LAW, it was the wrong decision.
As you may know, legal decisions are decided on the basis of the Facts and the Law. In the lower court a "fact-finder" determines the Facts (the jury does this, or if there is no jury, then the judge, sitting as fact-finder), and the judge determines the law (for example, in rulings or instructions to the jury, "If you find A, then B is what you must do"). Appeals to higher courts are only on the basis of the Law, errors in Law, never on the Facts. (The initial court is always the determiner of fact, which is why appeals courts, including supremes, are simply one judge or a panel of judges, and never juries; if they decide that the law requires new findings of fact, then it is sent back down.)
In cases where the law has granted administrative power to an official (an area that is called, generally, Administrative Law), it is already known that the legislators cannot possibly write all laws covering all circumstances, so they leave certain things to the administrator's discretion. Huge areas of federal and state government are subject to Administrative rather than Judicial law: the INS, the EPA, the IRS, local zoning, etc. And elections, as we now know. Judiciaries can review administrative acts and decisions, of course.
The standard of review for administrative discretion is much narrower than for findings of law in a lower court. The reviewer simply asks himself whether or not the administrator has been arbitrary or capricious in making his/her decision. NOT whether s/he has been right or wrong, or whether the judge would make a different decision. As long as the administrator has been logical and consistent, then discretion has been properly exercised.
What the Dems are doing, by demonizing every Republican and pressuring every Democrat, is extremely dangerous to the rule of law, imho.
Unfortunately, if the Dems on the FL Supreme Ct do muck around with the election, I think the US Supreme Ct will not get involved. Strangely enough, because it's a fairly conservative court, they will most likely decide that FL election law is, for better or worse, to be determined by the legislature and courts of FL. Separation of powers, state rights. In other words, the US Supes will not make a bad decision just because the junior varsity in Tallahassee did.
While we're waiting for the OSX to rally, I just thought I'd toss this weenie on the fire. |
