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: jlallen who wrote (541448)	2/17/2004 4:09:17 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

There's really no room to disagree if one reads the decision fairly and compares it with the Court's prior decisions..... Are there any "prior Court decisions" in which the U.S. Supreme Court ordered a halt to a recount ordered by a State Supreme Court? No room to disagree? And as far as room to disagree is concerned, well, some of the judges on the Court itself take exception to your view: Justice Stevens said the court's action "can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land.'' His dissenting opinion, also signed by Justices Breyer and Ginsburg, added: "It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.'' 12 December 2000 There's plenty of room to disagree. "The split between the two camps on the high court was complete, with Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the minority, arguing that granting the stay might well "be tantamount to a decision on the merits." He added, "Preventing the recount from being completed will inevitably cast a cloud on the legitimacy of the election." He was right. It was inevitable. Reminder: the discussion we are having in which you are continuing to urge non-questioning of the order to stop counting the ballots was precipitated by this single sentence of mine: "I won't even comment on the way he himself got elected."