Tags: Kangaroo | Court | Set | Jump | for | Gore?

Kangaroo Court Set to Jump for Gore?

Tuesday, 21 November 2000 12:00 AM

What is it that has led most observers to have reached this conclusion?

For starters, Chief Judge Charles Wells is a financial contributor to the Clinton-Gore campaign.

This is unbelievable!

The canons of judicial ethics counsel that he really ought to have recused himself. But there he was, black robes and all, making clearly partisan assumptions, such as

Say what?

This was not a hypothetical question intended to elicit legal theory but, rather, demonstrated his preconceived belief that Gore will win enough votes in the hand count. What about the presumption that the outcome cannot be known until

So much for impartiality!

And how about the question from Justice Barbara Pariente, to Bush attorney Carvin, inquiring as to what Texas law says on the issue of hand counts?

What, pray tell, was the purpose of that inquiry if not to inject a political slap at Governor Bush? Why not ask about Tennessee or Arkansas law?

And what about the court's ruling Friday, on its own motion - which means without a party to the case requesting it - ordering the Secretary of State

This kind of judicial overreaching is, at the very least, extra-constitutional, but can also be rightly viewed as a highly partisan effort to thwart the election of Governor Bush by giving the Gore vote-miners more time to mystically 'divine' enough votes as

Of course, bearing in mind that every one of the seven justices were named to the bench by Democrat governors, it perhaps shouldn’t be so very surprising that bias and favoritism would be so introduced into the case.

What’s more, Dexter Douglass, the Florida lawyer and Democrat activist who recommended the appointment of five of the seven judges to the high court to then Democrat Governor Lawton Childs, was sitting in the front row of the courtroom yesterday - with the Gore lawyers – as if to ‘remind’ them how they came to find themselves in the lofty positions they now hold.

"They'll know I'm at the table," Mr. Douglass boasted to the New York Times recently about his Gore role before the Supreme Court today.

Some have suggested this scene is eerily reminiscent of the congressional hearing scene in "The Godfather," where a relative of the star witness was flown in from Sicily and sat with Michael Corleone in the front row, to send a message of intimidation, which resulted in the desired outcome.

We very well may see the court stay true to its history of overstepping its constitutional authority by once again acting as if it were the legislature.

On previous occasions this is exactly the role it has assumed for itself, as when it repeatedly struck down, on rather flimsy legal grounds, various conservative referenda passed by the legislature, thereby thwarting the will of the people’s representatives and preventing statewide votes.

A fair reading of Florida election statutes, which are clear and unambiguous,

There are still other cards to be played, should the court so rule:

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is still a viable forum to which an appeal from the Florida high court may be taken, as noted in its recent ruling declining to bar a hand count until the state has finally acted. There is federal case law on point in similar cases where equal protection voting issues have propelled this court into action.

The secretary of state could simply ignore the questionable injunction and act per her statutory authority and certify the election now.

The Florida legislature has the prerogative, under the U.S. Constitution, to meet and select a slate of electors, the election results notwithstanding. This, however, would take an amazing measure of courage not often demonstrated by politicians.

Finally, there is a belief among some in the House of Representatives that Congress itself could refuse to accept 'tainted' Gore Florida electors, which could then ultimately result in the Congress itself choosing the president by votes of each of the state delegations, with each having a single vote. (Republicans have a majority of the state delegations.)

While it is certainly always possible the court could simply affirm the lower court and end the entire matter, such an outcome does seem highly improbable.

Meanwhile the clock is ticking, moving the process ever closer to the December 12 deadline for presenting a certified slate of electors to the Congress in advance of the December 18 meeting of the Electoral College.

A ruling should be forthcoming either today or tomorrow.

For now, we’ll have to wait and take it from there.

Visit the

Dan Frisa represented New York in the United States Congress and served four terms in the New York State Assembly. E-mail Dan:

• Nov. 22, 11 a.m. – American Freedom Network from Corona Del Mar, Calif., with Dr. James Hirsen

© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

What is it that has led most observers to have reached this conclusion? For starters, Chief Judge Charles Wells is a financial contributor to the Clinton-Gore campaign. This is unbelievable! The canons of judicial ethics counsel that he really ought to have recused...
Tuesday, 21 November 2000 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved