Ken:
Hi Ken:
Trying to catch up again. I'm sure there's a lot of commotion here in the posts ahead. But first I wanted to take the opportunity to respond to your post.
As you know, certiorari can be granted by four justices
Certiorari is granted by a way of a writ. The Court, not the individual justices themselves, grant the writ. Yes, I believe it takes four of nine votes to for the Court to issue the writ, or grant cert. But, Ken, how many justices voted to grant the writ is irrelevant. Why raise such a issue at this point. The US Supreme Court has granted cert. Period.
. . . . it is hard to read anything into this action.
Yes, Ken, what you say is true, and is commonly said by every lawyer who is trying to predict a priori how the Court may rule on a case it has agreed to hear. We can only speculate. It is widely held by many legal scholars that what the State Supreme Court did was so far overreaching as to challenge Article II of the Constitution and the Federal statutory scheme granting plenary power to the state legislatures when it comes to regulating procedures governing presidential election. My comments to which I presume you are responding here are not based upon any outcome, but by the fact the Court agreed to review the case, where most felt that such an event was unlikely. I have maintained here that what the Florida Supreme Court did last week, whether you think it acted properly or improperly, could not go untested and remain as law, not only in Florida, but in each and every state, without higher court review. If the Florida Supreme Court can make mince meat of its legislature's election laws that govern presidential elections, what's to stop another state's high court from doing the same? Final answer: a US Supreme Court ruling on the matter.
How the US Supreme Court is ultimately gonna rule on this matter is a completely different discussion. Chances are the High Court is going to set forth some legal principles as to what state courts can and cannot do regarding presidential election procedures. Now whether such a ruling will invalidate what the State Supreme Court did is anybody's guess at this point. I think its likely they will overturn the State Supreme Court's decision, but I am unsure as to what ELSE, if anything, they may do in their ruling.
The bottom line I get from your post is that you feel just because only four justices voted to grant cert that for some reason you think the ruling of Florida Supreme Court ruling is likely to stand. I wouldn't be that complacent if I were you. As YOU know, the US Supreme Court does not grant cert just to any case, and even though the circumstances of this case are extremely important, I think it is reasonable to conclude that IF the US Supreme Court were content and supportive of the Florida Supreme Court ruling, it would more than likely NOT have granted cert.
In short, your optimism on this particular matter is unfounded. |
