The election of President Gore, Bush v. Gore
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 16, 2024, 09:50:00 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.)
  The election of President Gore, Bush v. Gore
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: The decision was...
#1
Sound
 
#2
Unsound
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 10

Author Topic: The election of President Gore, Bush v. Gore  (Read 1013 times)
Peter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,030


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -7.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 12, 2005, 11:50:45 PM »

Justice Ginsburg delivered the Opinion of the Court

It is as clear as the day that the Presidential election of barely a month ago was subject to some of the most egregious examples of fraud our nation, and indeed our world, has ever known.

Governor George W Bush of Texas and his associates throughout the machinery of the Florida State Department have systematically disenfranchised voters, falsified vote counts and most generally have reduced the integrity of the Florida electoral system to that of a Banana Republic.

Today we are asked by Governor Bush to become yet another part of the crooked machinery that will elect him to the Presidency. This Court replies to that request quite simply: No.

Given the widespread fraud, it is our duty to find a remedy that will either eliminate this fraud, or in some way allow "equal fraud" that benefits Vice President Gore. This is justified under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

It is clear that the equal fraud approach is the most likely to give Gore a more decisive victory, therefore we construct our remedy as such:

Given the number of times the ballots of Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties have been counted, we feel it is most fair if only the votes are counted in the tabulation given the obvious extra effort officials in those counties have had to put in. Again, this is justified by the equal protection clause, which in this case should only apply to the workloads of the election officials.

After applying our remedy it is clear that Bush cannot overcome the size of the Gore victory, and we therefore declare that the Florida State Legislature should award its electoral votes to Vice President Gore.

Congratulations President-Elect Gore

It is so ordered.

    Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Souter, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which O'Connor and Scalia, JJ., joined. Rehnquist, C.J. and Kennedy, J., took no part in the decision of this case due to sudden medical emergencies. Rehnquist, C.J. later succumbed.

Justice Thomas, dissenting.

That Ruth jEW Bader Ginsburg is a real Bitch, isn't she.

OMGLOL!!!111

I dissent.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2005, 12:02:20 AM »

Not funny
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,596


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2005, 12:39:48 AM »
« Edited: November 13, 2005, 03:01:59 AM by Senator Porce »

The ruling was utter bunk.  I agree with Justice Thomas' dissent on the following grounds:  first, nowhere in the Constitution are jEWS authorised to write Supreme Court rulings.  Second, despite this obvious reason the whole ruling was incorrect, if we pay actual attention to the ruling, we can see it would still be utter bunk even if a non-jEW had written it; for example, nowhere in the Constitution is the Supreme Court authorised to congratulate winners of Presidential elections; the text of the majority opinion gives specific congratulations to Mr. Gore, while denying Mr. Bush these congratulations, which is a violation of the equal protection clause.  Clearly, a terrible ruling.

</peter bell>
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,356
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2005, 12:52:56 AM »

Some ruling.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.217 seconds with 13 queries.