Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jill who wrote (17441)	11/17/2000 4:37:49 PM
From: t2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

I hope the supreme court just wanted to prevent a certification until they had a chance to hear the arguments. I don't think this decision reflects what side they are leaning towards. I believe (or hope) it is just a matter of avoiding a certification and then try to uncertify. Even though most are judges are Democrat appointed, I don't think they will be biased in their decision and hopefully just rule against Gore.

To: Jill who wrote (17441)	11/17/2000 4:44:31 PM
From: Cactus Jack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 65232

Jill, The Supreme Court's ruling today makes complete sense. If the justices intend to review the ruling this morning in which the judge found that Ms. Harris did not act arbitrarily in rejecting the late-tallied votes, their ruling must come before Ms. Harris certifies the completion of the election. Therefore, the Supremes stayed the certification itself. This does not necessarily mean that the Supremes will overrule the judge's findings this morning; in fact, I bet they don't. jpgill