Danny ChaiHere’s the Supreme Court decision in regards to the extension of the deadline for manual recounts in Florida by the Florida Supreme Court.
It’s pretty dope. I’ve never read a Supreme Court decision before, but I don’t know, it’s kind of cool. When they refer to the Florida Supreme Court, they use a lowercase “court”. But when they refer to themselves, they use the uppercase “Court”. Very cool. The coolest part, I think, is the very end, where it says, It is so ordered. Whoa. Power. That’s a phrase I want to use just once in my life.
Now, I’m just a caveman, and I don’t understand law, but this totally fascinates me. I read some stuff in the Mercury over the weekend, and it noted that an idea came up (not presented by Bush’s lawyers) during oral arguments before the Supreme Court, that Scalia and others seemed to hold onto that centered on Article II, whatever that means. But it’s something in the U.S. Constitution that talks about (Andrew can correct me) the state legislatures’ rights to select Presidential electors. Thus, the Florida Supreme Court, by effectively changing the terms of laws enacted before the election, were in violation of this.
According to the Mercury, this argument troubled some observers because (and again, I’m just a caveman, this world frightens me, so I might not be understanding) this Article (II) is one that didn’t trust the people to select a president, and thus gave power to the state legislatures. In times since, the legislatures’ decisions have been based on the democratic vote, but by focusing on Article II, it’s emphasizing the power of the state legislature to choose electors over the people’s right to vote for them. In the extreme (according to the Mercury, and with my limited legal understanding), it’s saying that people don’t have the right or power to elect a president.
Anyway, like I keep saying, I don’t fully understand it, but whatever, it’s fascinating to me.