http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3999085Never forget O'Connor's most important "swing vote"
My response is here:
"But knowing, as we do, that the five justices were only interested in finding some way, any way at all, to give the election to Bush, if the Florida Supreme Court had departed from the Florida statutory law and established a different and more specific uniform standard, as sure as God made green apples the U.S. Supreme Court would have pounced on this like a hungry tiger going after raw meat."
pg 153 Vincent Bugliosi: The Betrayl of America: How the Supreme Court undermined the constitution and chose our president.
I hope this criminal act is what she is remembered for.
Her swing vote matters, that is when the lack of accountability, the spin, the lawlessness and betrayl of the American people started,
and yes, it DOES matter.
1. Under Florida law, when the Florida Supreme Court finds a "challenge to the certified result is justified, it has the power to provide any relief appropriate under the circumstances..." (this resulted in the order for the manual recount of all disputed votes, the recount was proceeding smoothly when it was halted by US Supreme Court. The stay requested by Bush the Times said appeared "highly political" Now stays are usually granted if something will do irreparable harm to a party by proceeding, how was the recount doing irreparable harm to GWB???
2. Do you realize that the judges did not sign this decision, it was
done "per curiam" which is usually for unanimous decisions that are
non-controversial and brief.
3. Their intervention into the Florida election results was not the result of an appeal from a lower court but direct intrusion into states rights and how could this be an argument for equal protection when every state runs their elections differently.
4. This decision for equal protection in the electoral processes could have invalidated results throughout the country but it was only for the 2000 Florida election. How could the Supreme Court make a rule which they said had only local ramifications when the Supreme Court by it's very nature is a Federal function.
I'm no lawyer and I will probably be flamed by this but this is what I believe.