How the ballots were counted or not counted was irrelevant. The Constitution vests the power to appoint Electors in the Florida Legislature.
There is nothing in the Constitution about “running for President” or “voting for President”.
If Gore had won Florida by 50,000 votes, I’m sure the GOP Legislature would have agreed to send Gore’s Electors to DC. But under the conditions that existed in Florida on the day after Election Day and afterwards, there was no way that heavily Republican Legislature was not going to send the Bush Electors up the line.
The Supreme Court invented an extra-Constitutional process, stuck its nose in where it had no business, and increased its own power at the same time.
Not really. It didn’t rule on any of that - it ruled on the counting process and whether it was legal / constitutional for the election that was held - on that the ballots were indeed relevant. It did not rule on the appointment of Electors, where the power for this was, etc. Even during the oral arguments it was said (and agreed by the Florida attorney) to a question posed by Justice O’Connor that the legislature would have the power to appoint the Electors directly under the Constitution regardless of this outcome of the count, to which he had to say “Yes...we would agree with that.”
https://youtu.be/x_O0H7dFrjg?si=FpYCp4F5yGOj4TE6&t=2581
Takes to you part of the arguments in question I noted above.
They shouldn't have stepped in at all, it rested entirely on the state of Florida. Same issues occurred in 2020, the SC said nah, courts can set the voting laws of each state, instead of the actual legislature of that state.