Scalia needs killing
Just. Un. Believable. The first mention of legal action in the 2000 election timeline is this: “Saturday, Nov. 11—The Bush team, led by former secretary of state James Baker, files suit in federal court to block Gore's request for a hand recount.” Does Scalia not know this? Or is he trying to pull the wool over the eyes of his audience? ( makethemaccountable )
New York Post
SCALIA RAPS GORE FOR '00
By FRANKIE EDOZIEN
November 22, 2005 -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says the high court did not inject itself into the 2000 presidential election.
Speaking at the Time Warner Center last night, Scalia said: "The election was dragged into the courts by the Gore people. We did not go looking for trouble."
But he said the court had to take the case.
"The issue was whether Florida's Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court [would decide the election.] What did you expect us to do? Turn the case down because it wasn't important enough?"
The conservative justice, who grew up in Queens, contended there would have been a difficult transition had the court not stepped in.
He also pointed out that studies by news organizations after the election showed Bush still would have won a Florida recount.
[What the studies showed is that Gore won Florida. Gore won the election. He was kept from his rightful place in the White House by Antonin Scalia. But if that hadn’t been the case, Scalia was WRONG to stop the counting of votes. The Supreme Court has NO ROLE in the election of presidents, according to the vast majority of legal experts who have commented on Bush v. Gore. Scalia is trying to rewrite history.—Caro]
New York Post
SCALIA RAPS GORE FOR '00
By FRANKIE EDOZIEN
November 22, 2005 -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says the high court did not inject itself into the 2000 presidential election.
Speaking at the Time Warner Center last night, Scalia said: "The election was dragged into the courts by the Gore people. We did not go looking for trouble."
But he said the court had to take the case.
"The issue was whether Florida's Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court [would decide the election.] What did you expect us to do? Turn the case down because it wasn't important enough?"
The conservative justice, who grew up in Queens, contended there would have been a difficult transition had the court not stepped in.
He also pointed out that studies by news organizations after the election showed Bush still would have won a Florida recount.
[What the studies showed is that Gore won Florida. Gore won the election. He was kept from his rightful place in the White House by Antonin Scalia. But if that hadn’t been the case, Scalia was WRONG to stop the counting of votes. The Supreme Court has NO ROLE in the election of presidents, according to the vast majority of legal experts who have commented on Bush v. Gore. Scalia is trying to rewrite history.—Caro]
posted by professor rat at 10:53 PM
<< Home