By a vote of 6-1, the state high court issued a statement, read by court spokesman Craig Waters, explaining that its original ruling was based upon Florida state law.
Chief Justice Wells was the lone dissenter, stating his reservation that it was inappropriate to issue such a statement at a time when the U.S. Supreme Court was deliberating the current case,
At this morning's oral arguments in Washington, D.C., Justice Sandra Day O'Connor expressed her serious concern that the Florida court had not responded to the U.S. Supreme Court decision vacating the Florida decision, which delicately requested that an explanation be provided indicating whether the state court had relied upon state law or the state constitution.
This issue was of some importance due to the fact that, in dealing with a federal election for president, only an interpretation of state law would be deemed within the state court's province given the U.S. Constitution's express granting of power to state legislatures.
Certainly, the Florida court could have, and should have, addressed this issue in its Friday decision on the Gore appeal that overturned the "contest of election case" rejected by Florida Circuit Judge N. Sanders Sauls.
Such an 11th hour clarification appears to be a case of too little, too late.
E-mail Dan:
Visit the
Dan Frisa represented New York in the United States Congress and served four terms in the New York State Assembly.
Outraged by Gore's election theft? The Florida Supreme Court? Click here to voice your opinion with a NewsMax.com PriorityGram. It's more powerful than an e-mail or phone call.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.