Judge supports rejecting late votes

Michael Pollak mpollak at panix.com
Sat Nov 18 00:02:07 PST 2000


On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, Nathan Newman wrote:


> Up to this point, certification was always treated as a pro forma
> bureaucratic decision that folks felt free to contest in court. Suddenly,
> the GOP makes certification a holy grail for when all court challenges
> should end. Now, the courts could just reiterate that the Secretary of
> State could be free to certifiy the election but tell everyone not to take
> it seriously.

Your explanation makes it all much clearer. My only question concerns whether, under all the Republican bad faith, there isn't something to the idea that a presidential election is different, and that court action has to be limited. What I mean is that most of us have no problem with the idea of a mayor getting sworn in, and then getting kicked out two months later. But the idea of it happening to a president -- and happening at the hands of a state court -- seems by contrast to be inconceivable, a constitutional crisis to be avoided at all costs.

That said, clearly those limits give us all of us November to play with at the very least.

Michael

__________________________________________________________________________ Michael Pollak................New York City..............mpollak at panix.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list