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: jttmab who wrote (5922)12/13/2000 7:05:38 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) of 6710
 
>>Trial judge feels vindicated by U.S. Supreme
Court

December 13, 2000
Web posted at: 3:54 a.m. EST (0854 GMT)

TALLAHASSEE, Florida (CNN) -- The
trial judge who ruled against a Gore
campaign plea for hand counts of
so-called "undervotes" in Florida feels
vindicated by the U.S. Supreme Court
ruling in the case Tuesday night, his
wife told CNN.

Leon County Circuit Judge N. Sanders
Sauls, whose ruling against the vice
president was overturned by the Florida
Supreme Court, "felt his opinion had been upheld," his wife, Cindy, said. "We
feel good there's closure for our country."

She said her husband watched news coverage of the Supreme Court decision,
concluded he'd been correct in his initial decision and promptly went to bed.

After the state Supreme Court reversed his ruling, Sauls recused himself from
the case without saying why, forcing the county to appoint another judge to
supervise the recount that was quickly halted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

On Tuesday night, Mrs. Sauls told CNN that he felt the ruling by the state's high
court was unconstitutional. "I don't see why the court has the power to do that,"
the judge's wife quoted him as saying. "They are going against the Constitution
of the U.S. I've got to recuse myself. I can't in good conscience go forward
when I feel everything within me says it's against the (U.S.) Constitution."

Mrs. Sauls said her husband did not think it would be appropriate to explain his
recusal until after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case.

"He didn't say it publicly at the time because he knew another judge would be
assigned," she said. "Now he feels it's over."<<

cnn.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext