Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)After Casting Key Fifth Vote For Bush, Justice O’Connor Now Regrets Bush v. Gore [View all]
After Casting Key Fifth Vote For Bush, Justice OConnor Now Regrets Bush v. Gore
By Ian Millhiser
Justice Sandra Day OConnor, the conservative retired justice who provided the fifth vote to install George W. Bush as president, is now having second thoughts about that decision:
If nothing else, Bush v. Gore demonstrates how justices who are determined to reach a certain result are capable of bending both the law and their own prior jurisprudence in order to achieve it. In Bush, the five conservative justices held, in the words of Harvards Larry Tribe, that equal protection of the laws required giving no protection of the laws to the thousands of still uncounted ballots.
The Courts decision to hand the presidency to Bush stunned many legal observers, some of whom were OConnors fellow justices. Retired Justice John Paul Stevens once recounted a story where he ran into fellow Justice Stephen Breyer at a party while a relatively early phase of the case was pending before the Court. According to Stevens, (w)e agreed that the application was frivolous.
Indeed, Bushs own lawyers were skeptical of the legal theory that ultimately made up the basis of the Courts decision in Bush. As Ben Ginsberg, a top lawyer on Bushs presidential campaign, explained in 2006, just like really with the Voting Rights Act, Republicans have some fundamental philosophical difficulties with the whole notion of Equal Protection.
- more -
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/04/29/1931821/after-casting-key-fifth-vote-for-bush-justice-oconnor-now-regrets-bush-v-gore/
By Ian Millhiser
Justice Sandra Day OConnor, the conservative retired justice who provided the fifth vote to install George W. Bush as president, is now having second thoughts about that decision:
Looking back, OConnor said, she isnt sure the high court should have taken <Bush v. Gore>.
It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue, OConnor said during a talk Friday with the Tribune editorial board. Maybe the court should have said, Were not going to take it, goodbye.
The case, she said, stirred up the public and gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation.
Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision, she said. It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadnt done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day.
If nothing else, Bush v. Gore demonstrates how justices who are determined to reach a certain result are capable of bending both the law and their own prior jurisprudence in order to achieve it. In Bush, the five conservative justices held, in the words of Harvards Larry Tribe, that equal protection of the laws required giving no protection of the laws to the thousands of still uncounted ballots.
The Courts decision to hand the presidency to Bush stunned many legal observers, some of whom were OConnors fellow justices. Retired Justice John Paul Stevens once recounted a story where he ran into fellow Justice Stephen Breyer at a party while a relatively early phase of the case was pending before the Court. According to Stevens, (w)e agreed that the application was frivolous.
Indeed, Bushs own lawyers were skeptical of the legal theory that ultimately made up the basis of the Courts decision in Bush. As Ben Ginsberg, a top lawyer on Bushs presidential campaign, explained in 2006, just like really with the Voting Rights Act, Republicans have some fundamental philosophical difficulties with the whole notion of Equal Protection.
- more -
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/04/29/1931821/after-casting-key-fifth-vote-for-bush-justice-oconnor-now-regrets-bush-v-gore/
Yeah, hundreds of thousands of dead people later...
Krugman: The Great Degrader
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022764804
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022768880
George W. Bush's magic calendar returns
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022766502
45 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
After Casting Key Fifth Vote For Bush, Justice O’Connor Now Regrets Bush v. Gore [View all]
ProSense
Apr 2013
OP
No, it isn't her fault, she just had a vote on the Supreme Court. Who the blame is some 18 year old
TheKentuckian
Apr 2013
#9
REALLY Justice Occonor??!!!! This decision was one of many that helped turn the USSC into a joke!!
uponit7771
Apr 2013
#6
Translation - "I fucked you all but I feel bad about it, if that makes a difference"
tjwash
Apr 2013
#15
"Thanks a pantload for 8 years of FAIL, Sandra" - The Citizens of these United States
Berlum
Apr 2013
#21
Yeah, Justice O'Connor, some of us have been regretting your decision since you made it.
AndyA
Apr 2013
#28
No, that scenario wouldn't have went to the Supreme Court, it would've been up to Congress
Uncle Joe
Apr 2013
#31