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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chomolungma who wrote (122293)	12/12/2000 4:00:26 PM
From: ratan lal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

means the law is unconstitutional and any handcount done under it is invalid So if someone commits a murder and a specific law is used to convict him. Then they find the law to be unconstitutional, will they throw out the conviction?

To: chomolungma who wrote (122293)	12/12/2000 4:11:13 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

C, re: But events have proven that "intent of the voter" is too vague to provide equal protection. That means the law is unconstitutional and any handcount done under it is invalid. And since you can't change the law for this election there is no valid count after the machine count. Case closed. What "events" have proved that intent of the voter is too vague? I saw or read that that is the standard in 33 states. The US SC better not get into the role of determining the details of state's elections or they are going to be very busy folks. John