(no subject)

[vicarz]

Damnit - I can't deny that I'm sick, but it's a strange sort of sick. First of all, it's on my fucking time off. I don't get sick the entire semester, but now on my 'vacation' to do more schoolwork, I am stuffy. Now, that's the odd thing. I feel fine, did 3.5 hours in the gym feeling fine on Sunday - but I can't breathe w/o medication. I'm ok for about an hour after I blast my nose with icky spray, that you're only supposed to use once every 4 hours. Allergies maybe? Whatever the icky case, it calls for Indian food - that much is certain. Give me the garlic and curry!

I'm not very good at ripping apart SC decisions, but I've just read Bush v. Gore from the election, and really do get the impression that the decision was legally bizarre. I look forward to hearing my conservative prof's commentary on it.

The gist of the unsigned opinion seems to be that the Florida state supreme court unfairly intruded on the state legislature by interpreting and ruling on their law as it applied to the facts. Isn't that exactly what the courts are supposed to do? Stranger still is the US Supreme Court now stepping in on ambiguous constitutional authority, with the 'conservative' side of the court overruling the state - breaking with their general tradition of trumpeting the glory of state's rights.

The deadline issue, they put a lot of faith on that but many other jurisdictions were late w/o penalty. It also was not a reasonable deadline. So, is the FL SC being activist (they're all dems) when they rule to extend the time period, or are they trying to accomplish what the legislature indicated they wanted done? Is it a reasonable interpretation or no?

The stretches of a) jurisdiction and b) interpretation that c) are highly out of character for the conservative judges, make me wonder if perhaps the issue was decided on party lines. I certainly have heard that accusation many times before, but I had never read the specific arguments made. As I said, I look forward to hearing a more learned interpretation - especially one not based on leaning sideways on the bed while trying to breath through a wall of mucus.

Comments

[rivki8699.livejournal.com]

Well, if you'd like a nice, reasoned discussion of Bush v. Gore and its effect on the Legitimacy of the Supreme Court you can always read my thesis. Which was titled The Effect of Bush v. Gore on the Legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I've heard that argument made, but I'm more wrapped up in the actual legal arguments rather than the political effects. Sounds cool though.

[rivki8699.livejournal.com]

Well, I give a bunch of background on the legal arguements about why it's bad. Mostly about the Political Questions Doctrine and the "safe harbor" clause that they based the decision on. Boy was that a bad decision. In so many ways. And as you say, so contrary to the 'strict constructionism' that Rhenquist and Scalia say they espouse.