[AmericanVictory]

You might want to actually this, where I set it out at the time. The Constitution clearly states that the legislators of each state are to prescribe. The Florida Supreme Court, in order to achieve its desired political goal, made up an imaginary, supposed statutory conflict that did not exist and used that imaginary conflict to contravene the clear prescription of the Florida legislature and moved the date set by the legislature. The U. S. Supreme Court upheld the language of the Constitution and made Florida adhere to the constitutionally mandated prescription of the legislature. The prescription set by the Florida legislature was pursuant to the clear mandate of the language of the Constitution and the Florida court had no power to alter it on a phony pretext.

[jay1949]

Excellent and cogent summary of the substantive issue in Gore v. Bush. I will add, the vote was 7-2 on that issue, which means that Scalia had conservative, moderate and liberal support for his conclusion. The 5-4 vote came on the procedural question of what to do next - - remand, or call it done. The majority, barely, went for calling it done. That can be argued both ways, but the fact remained that the decision had to be made within the parameters of the Constitution, and calling it done was the only one that fit.

[Jim Noble]

The prescription set by the Florida legislature was pursuant to the clear mandate of the language of the Constitution and the Florida court had no power to alter it on a phony pretext.

Of course.

Do you doubt, for a minute, that the special Joint Session of Congress on January 3, 2001, assembled for the very purpose of resolving such conflicts, would have so ruled?