[E. Pluribus Unum]

Where the hell is judicial activism when you need it?

[jf55510]

The high court two years ago issued a 5-4 decision that cleared the way for Republican George W. Bush to defeat Democrat Al Gore and become the 43rd U.S. President.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the vote 7-2?

[aristeides]

Members of the military also are filing a separate suit backing Forrester in federal district court in Trenton.

This may mean that the problem can be solved without the SCOTUS agreeing to take the case. After the SCOTUS laid down the law in Bush v. Gore, the lower federal courts are perfectly capable of applying it to new cases.

[Freedom4US]

Notice the journalistic style on virtually all the articles you'll read about this usually read "Republicans say..."

It's not a Republican thing, folks. It's the LAW that says ya can't swap in a new candidate just because your guy is going to lose, but of course they won't mention the obvious. Nothing to see here, just move along.

[jackbill]

Republicans say Torricelli dropped out only because he was losing to Republican Douglas Forrester

Excuse me! Didn't Torricelli say that himself? Didn't he say that he didn't want to be responsible for the DemocRATs losing the Senate?

[rintense]

If they ignore it now, they'll just have to hear again during the next election- when the Democrats will uses the same dirty tricks to try and fix another election. Slap it down now to prevent this from happening in the future.

[Jack Black]

RINOS are worse than Dems. At least in Florida we could say Kangaroo Court and it looked like it. Here you have a RINO appointed court (6 of 7). Maybe Bush should ask Ms. Whitmann to resign now. Obviously anyone who appointed these six idiots is herself an incompetent. She should not head a federal agency, especially one as dangerous and out of control as the EPA.

Ideological Purification of the R party is key.

[be131]

Ironic really, considering that the New Jersey case presents a clearer violation of the law (in my opinion) than the Florida case.

[CaptRon]

''The court really hated being involved in Bush v. Gore and doesn't want to send a signal that every political fight should be an issue for the court.''

OK. Fair enough. Then how about perpetrating a fraud on the voters of New Jersey?!

[1Old Pro]

The SCOTUS should get involved because it's the right thing to do. I don't care what people think about them getting involved in Florida.

The fact is, this is an egregious flouting of the law by the NJ supremes and it must be corrected.

[ClearCase_guy]

I honestly don't understand the reluctance. The Supremes are appointed for life -- precisely for this reason. They should always make the RIGHT decision and not make decisions based on their own future popularity. They are supposed to be above such worries, right?

[Eala]

Weeks after the ruling, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who voted in the majority, said he hoped courts ''will seldom, if ever,'' become involved in another U.S. presidential election.

Me too -- except my hope would be that this would happen because the Dems quit trying to win elections by involving the judiciary.

Since they haven't, for the Court to ignore such actions would signal that the Rule of Law is truly and thoroughly dead, that the Great Experiment is over and the results are in (it failed), and that what really only matters anymore is what you can get away with.

But then, it's coming for a long, long time -- we just haven't been paying attention.

[AmericanVictory]

This article appears to be an exercise in wishful thinking by your typical Eurosocialist oriented pressie to whom U.S. constitutionalism is utterly foreign.

[goldstategop]

I'm for conservative judicial activism to give the liberal scofflaws at the New Jersey Supreme Court a taste of their own medicine. Nothing would give me more pleasure than to see the SCOTUS kick their pompous asses into the dirt.