Looks like I spoke too soon on the election business ending. Just heard on the radio about the Florida Supreme Court overturning the lower court's ruling and ordering recounts to begin. May the civics lesson continue!
Next steps, as far as I see are:
1. Florida Legislature setting a really bad precedent by allocating electors themselves (especially bad because such a bill would require Jeb Bush to sign it, setting the stage for hundreds of years of conspiracy theories.
2. Immediate appeal of all these decisions to the Supreme Court by Bush, followed by
3. Immediate appeal of number 1 to the Supreme Court by Gore, based on the 1887 Safe Harbor act, ironically the same act by which Bush first appealed the initial recount decision to the Supreme Court. Basically it says you can't change the rules of an election midstream. This is a neat constitutional crisis, because Article II, section 1 of the Constitution says that "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors. . . " yet Article VI says that ". . . the Laws of the United States . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land; . . . any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Thus, a direct conflict between two Articles of the Constitution. I love it.
Next steps, as far as I see are:
1. Florida Legislature setting a really bad precedent by allocating electors themselves (especially bad because such a bill would require Jeb Bush to sign it, setting the stage for hundreds of years of conspiracy theories.
2. Immediate appeal of all these decisions to the Supreme Court by Bush, followed by
3. Immediate appeal of number 1 to the Supreme Court by Gore, based on the 1887 Safe Harbor act, ironically the same act by which Bush first appealed the initial recount decision to the Supreme Court. Basically it says you can't change the rules of an election midstream. This is a neat constitutional crisis, because Article II, section 1 of the Constitution says that "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors. . . " yet Article VI says that ". . . the Laws of the United States . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land; . . . any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Thus, a direct conflict between two Articles of the Constitution. I love it.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home