Perhaps this repost will help:
I will not take the time to dissect each one of the points, since they have been discussed to death already. I will summarize the other point of view, though: since this is a federal election, and the Florida Supreme Court overruled Judge Sauls, and supplanted the mechanisms and timetables established by the Florida legislature on ostensible equity grounds, the federal Supreme Court got to scrutinize whether there were sufficient reason to intervene, and whether the solution propounded were itself equitable (under the Fourteenth Amendment and doctrine of incorporation). Even granting the right of the Florida Supreme Court to intervene (something of which some justices were doubtful), the solution, which purported to improve equity, was found to be deficient. It is silly to say that the legislature propounded the "clear intent of the voter" standard, since it was begging to be clarified by the court, and the court had already been aggressive in intervention. Thus, the failure to propound standards which were universal and clear vitiated the ruling. Now, it was conceivable that the Florida Supreme Court could have satisfied the objection and proceeded. But there was no time to do so without missing the "safe harbor" date, and subjecting whatever slate was affirmed to challenge in Congress. It was the clear intent of the legislature to meet the "safe harbor" deadline. Although the SCOTUS affirmed the right of the SCOFLA to order the manual recounts in the first place, as part of the contest period, it took the position that the SCOFLA did not have the right to override the intent of the legislature to meet the "safe harbor" provision, ending the contest period. In other words, it did not back the view that the equity considerations overrode the intent of the legislature to end the contest by the "safe harbor", and thus ensure that its electors were beyond challenge in the Congress. Since, by Article II, the legislature has the absolute right to determine the method of selection of electors, including the right to take back selection from the electorate, its intention to back whatever electors are certified by the 12th cannot be overridden. |
