As technologies change, that time could easily reduce, certainly not to 0 but to something much less than 51.
That's a good reason to change the law, not to override it from the bench. In the NJ case, the absentee ballots had already been shipped out with Torricelli's name on them.
Moreover, no one has said that, once the primaries are concluded, a party cannot change it's candidates. Unusual. Absolutely.
Um, isn't that a matter for state election law to rule on?
Frankly, I think the issue goes back to the Florida election, in which the US Supreme Court said that state courts were not the proper place to adjudicate the meaning of state statutes. Only the legislature could do that.
Since the NJ legislature and SCOTUS stayed out of this one, I don't see where this 'issue' comes into play.
That twisted logic applied, precisely, in this case, the Jersey case. Perhaps the second best evidence that this incarnation of the Supremes is far more political than recent previous incarnations is this
It would have done, if SCOTUS had taken the case. But they didn't. |
