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 : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: chomolungma who wrote (6087)12/13/2000 11:14:53 AM
From: Valley Girl  Read Replies (1) of 6710
 
Wouldn't any "new" standard have to be a "new law"...

You're probably right. That's the tragedy of the situation the FL SC found itself in. I think they knew (judging by Wells' dissent) that not setting a standard would lead to reversal on equal protection, while setting a standard would lead to a reversal on separation of powers. They could have reached into prior practice and case law, tho, to at least try to avoid the "new law" problem. Since there's no higher court to reverse them, the US SC could have thrown them a bone here (a la Breyer's opinion).

I don't normally agree with Justice Stevens, but on one point I have to agree, with this ruling the US SC has spent some of its precious goodwill. It is, after all, a state's rights court. Let's hope it won't take long to repair the damage.
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