[Bear_Slayer]

"And the decision was made as you know on a 5-4 vote on a highly partisan basis by the U.S. Supreme Court, so I would say in 2000, there was a failure."

Can someone summarize the decisions by the FSC vs. the USSC? If I remember correctly the USSC didn't vote GWB president, but sent the case back to the FSC with the idea that, and I paraphrase, "Your out of line"

Any good books been written the cover the election?

[OldFriend]

Remind ole Jimmah that the same Court voted 9 - 0 that Paula Jones could sue President Clinton while he was still in office.

[torchthemummy]

I am heading to work right now so real quick:

1 - The USSC did "vacate" the FSC decision to extend the deadline. It was a complete slap-down saying, in essence: we don't know how you got here. Then after the contests trial of Judge Sauls, the FSC reversed that decision, decided undervotes were to be tabulated not just in Gores chosen Demo counties but every county. All to be done in two days before the Dec. 12 federal deadline. The FSC didn't even address the vacating of their previous ruling and ignored essentially all the questions the USSC had in regards to the first decision.

But here is all you need to remember. There were two votes (dependent on the affirmative outcome of the first)- one to verify whether there had been equal protection violations and two whether there was time for a quick and accurate remedy. On the first the vote was 7-2 that there were equal protection violations. The much-quoted 5-4 decision is what finalized the victory for the president and rightfully so but the fact is it was truly a 7-2 decision that won the presidency for Bush.

As far as to a book - the best quick summary would be Bill Sammons "At Any Cost: How Al Gore Tried To Steal The Presidency"

[Christian4Bush]

Any good books been written the cover the (2000)election?

Definitely Bill Sammon's book "At Any Cost"...