Yeah, I know the majority cited stuff. But, it is easy to twist precedent to support a result. It was not actually a "standardless recount" b/c the standards were to be determined by the counties. There was no uniform state-wide standard, however.
There was technically no justiciable controversy UNTIL the legislature invoked the safe harbor provisions. Courts can't simply point to "possible" deadlines in order to create a controversy (other than applications for preliminary injunctions, etc., which I don't believe were involved here). The dissent was correct that the SCT could have dealt with the issue when and if the Florida legislature invoked the deadline.
This issue has, I'm sure, been adequately covered by this thread in the past. My point, which has been well lost in the debate, has (I believe) been proven:
(1) there are no objective facts, as there are always differing interpretations of them; and
(2) the law provides some guidelines for the process, but even it is relatively subjective (i.e. can be bent to reach a goal).
tired of the dead horse,
ham |
