Hi Art:
Sorry for the late reply. Its been a busy day, and just now am trying catch up here, but still have a ways to go. I did have a chance to catch a good portion of the hearing today on TV and found the lawyers' arguments extremely interesting. I think the high Court wants to do everything within its powers to fashion a remedy whereby the manual counts now underway MAY be counted, subject to discretionary review by the Secretary of State, with that discretion not based upon tardiness, but more upon their integrity and trustworthiness as expressive of the will of the voters of those counties. But balanced against those wishes, I think the Court is also going to respect, to the extent it must, the statutory scheme imposed by the State Legislature that grants certain discretionary powers to the Secretary of State and the State Canvassing Board along the lines of the separation of powers doctrine that I expressed here some time ago. In short, it appears the Court wishes to have the manual counts counted, but must fashion a judicial remedy that does not violate CONSTITUTIONALLY held principles as those articulated by the Bush attorney today. If it does, it is very possible, but not necessary likely, that the Bush team could appeal the State Court decision to the US Supreme Court as it is a matter of FEDERAL law that certain powers governing the presidential election are granted to the State LEGISLATURE, not the judiciary, and which the State Legislature has empowered ONLY the State Secretary to carry out. |
