I told my family a few weeks ago that I felt the Supreme Court wouldn't get involved in this because a) there's absolutely no federal issue (if equal protection really did apply in the way Bush's lawyers were contending, our entire decentralized voting scheme would be unconstitutional) and b) the Justices work hard to remove themselves from partisan bickering even as they persue certain ideological agendas. Strikes one and two. Well, from now on I'm going to take a few pitches to see what's out there before swinging for the fences. It's obvious why politicians have been harping about who's going to get to appoint Justices for the last 20 years. They really are just political pundits in black robes. Too bad, but good to know. I honestly believe that it will take a very long time for the court to re-legitimize itself and the sanctity of its place after this. Every one of these justices, regardless of how they voted, will be remembered as being on "the bench" that put Bush in office.

On a side note, it seems pretty clear that Scalia was working so hard to get the Florida Court overturned so that Bush could appoint some more conservative justices in his mold or, at the very least, the mold of Clarence Thomas. My only question is, how is Bush going to appoint conservative justices when the Democrats look at Scalia and Thomas as exactly what they don't want on the court and gave the dems all the ammo they'd want against conservative appointments in this ruling? The Senate is 50-50 now, and could very well be majority democratic in 2002, especially given the current republican leadership and its track record of losing seats in every election since '94. It seems that an itchy trigger finger may have gotten the better of Scalia's long term politicial and judicial goals.
- posted by levinson @ 12/13/2000 02:18:00 PM