that is, a reasonable expectation of reward under a Gore Presidency, or so strong an ideology that they couldn't be fair to Bush.
You're reaching Nadine... But nice try anyway.. :0)
There is simply no where to truly to quantify any such bias unless a justice actually was caught displaying it openly or in front a number of witnesses.
However, I think we can state with some certainty that Justice Stephen Breyer, recruited by, and considered a good friend of, Al Gore, probably should recuse himself from this vote tomorrow:
drudgereport.com
Breyer stunned watchers inside of the courtroom as he grilled Joseph Klock, a lawyer for Republican Secretary of State Katherine Harris. Justice Breyer framed the debate by stating: Whether we win, whether your side wins.
"And now the secretary has certified a winner," Justice Breyer declared. "And therefore, I guess, whether we win -- whether your side, the side you're supporting wins or loses, it doesn't change that."
The Justice's view that he is on the opposing side of Secretary Harris, who awarded George Bush the state's electoral votes, may be rooted in the fact that Vice President Gore is a personal friend -- who argued vigorously for the selection and confirmation of Breyer to the Court.
Gore was a driving force during formal meetings held by President Clinton's Supreme Court search team in the Spring of 1994. During the sessions, a list of a dozen prospects were considered to fill retiring Justice Harry Blackmun's seat. In the end, the nomination was given to Breyer, a personal friend of Gore's.
And Gore presided over Breyer's swearing-in ceremony.
There's your blatant bias, Nadine...
Caught on tape, in a Supreme Court hearing. |
