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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lawdog who wrote (109725)	12/10/2000 5:07:01 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Is the following statement factually correct? Did the United States Supreme Court rule that "these election decisions should be left to the Florida Supreme Court"? "Despite ruling just one week ago that these election decisions should be left to the Florida Supreme Court and were not for federal scrutiny, the land's highest court seems to have changed course in deciding the hotly disputed counts should stop for now." If so, why did they vacate the Florida Supreme Court's ruling and remand asking for a clarification? Vacating a ruling is inconsistent with stating that the decision was not for federal scrutiny. And it is my contention that the opinion did not state that "these election decisions should be left to the Florida Supreme Court." If you contend that it did please point out where.