Facebook Twitter Email
DECEMBER 13, 2000

Effectively handing Texas Governor George W. Bush the Presidency, the Supreme Court late Tuesday night overturned a Florida decision which granted Vice President Al Gore the right to a manual recount of thousands of ballots in the state.

The Bush camp eagerly welcomed the ruling, saying the Court had found Constitutional problems with the Florida recount. But Gore has been quiet so far on the issue, seeking more time to digest the Court's lengthy opinion before conceding.

In a split decision, the Court found that the Florida Supreme Court's December 8 decision to order a manual recount violated the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitution. The Court said no state is allowed to "value one person's vote over that of another."

This holding by the Court essentially validates Republican criticism of the recounts as selective and without a clear, consistent standard. The holding also calls into question the Florida Supreme Court's rulings which forced Secretary of State Katherine Harris to include updated vote counts from particular counties in her certification.

"The press of time does not diminish the constitutional concern," the Court said of partial vote counts. "A desire for speed is not a general excuse for ignoring equal protection guarantees."

But the Court expressed varying opinions on what could be done to ensure protection of voter's Constitutional rights. Seven justices total agreed there were equal protection and due process violations, including Stephen G. Breyer and David H. Souter, both of whom voted not to stop the Florida recounts in the first place.

Only five -- Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, and Clarence Thomas -- said to continue the recount would take too much time, money, and evaluation, thereby putting the state's 25 electoral votes in jeopardy.

The other four, however, disagreed. Justice John Paul Stevens was the most outspoken in his criticism, charging that the majority has eroded public confidence in the judiciary.

"Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision," wrote Stevens. "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."

Stevens authored a dissent, joined fully by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Breyer. Ginsburg authored another dissent, joined in full by Stevens, and in part by Souter and Breyer.

Chief Justice Rehnquist also wrote a supplementary concurrence, joined by Scalia and Thomas. It criticized the December 8 ordered recount as "elusive -- perhaps delusive."

While the manual recount has been reversed, the case has been sent back to Florida Supreme Court for further proceedings "not inconsistent" with the majority opinion.

Get the Opinions:
Bush et. al. v. Gore et. al (US Sup Ct 531 US _____ 2000)
Dissent: Stevens | Dissent: Ginsburg

Read/Hear the Supreme Court Hearing:
Real Audio of Supreme Court Hearing
Full Text Transcript of Supreme Court Hearing

Related Stories:
Supreme Court decision expected today (Politics 12/12)
Divided court to decide on divided race (Politics 12/11)
Indian Law and the Supreme Court (Tribal Law 12/11)
Supreme Court calls for recount (Politics 12/8)
Lawyers, lawmakers key in Presidential fight (Politics 12/7)