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: SecularBull who wrote (110647)	12/11/2000 1:53:54 PM
From: margie	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

Justice Kennedy and Scalia are questioning Boise: If the Florida Legislature changed the date like the FSC had; would that be a change in law? Boise said YES. Then Boise was asked, If the FSC changed the date, would that be a change in Law? Boise said No, that is an interpretation. O'Connor also questioning Boise on that: Shouldn't the FSC give the Legislature that deference. She also says they never responded to the remand, to any questions of deadlines changes etc.... O'Connor: How could they include votes with regard to their prior decision if that decision had been vacated? OOPS. Wrong. Justice Souter also saying that the FSC ordering that Palm Beach Ballots being added to the certification contravenes the decision which was vacated. Boise was asked What kind of standard he would suggest. He couldn't answer. Scalia said: You said Count the Votes? How can you ask that votes from two counties with different standards be included in post certification if both had different standards. Isn't that a violation of the EPA? answering their questions. If they order a recount, this will open up a can of worms for every single election. Connors: Why can't the standard be following the directions?