Supreme Court Vacates Florida Vote Ruling

In effect, the U.S. Supreme Court told the Democrat-appointed Florida Supreme Court that if it used its "equitable power" to resolve conflicts in state election laws, and did not introduce a "federal question" into its decision, then the state court would prevail.

If it wants to, the Florida Supreme Court in a matter of hours could refashion an earlier ruling extending the deadline for that state's final vote tally in a way that would leave the U.S. Supreme Court without the power to intervene.

Technically, what the U.S. Supreme Court did Monday was to "vacate," or throw out, the earlier ruling by the Florida Supreme Court extending the state vote-tally deadline. The justices also sent the case back to the Florida Supreme Court "for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion."

President-elect Bush had challenged the Florida Supreme Court ruling, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to quickly hear the case on two grounds: whether the Florida Supreme Court's action violated Article II of the Constitution, which says that the selection of presidential electors must be carried out in a manner prescribed by a state legislature; and whether it violated a 113-year-old federal law that says an election dispute must be settled under the laws in force on Election Day.

The justices also asked each side to discuss the "consequences" of disallowing votes discovered by manual recounts and factored into the final state tally by the extended deadline.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court said Monday it simply did not have enough information to decide those federal questions, which were the only ones on which it had power to rule.

"After reviewing the opinion of the Florida Supreme Court, we find that there is considerable uncertainty as to the precise grounds for the decision," the U.S. Supreme Court said in its opinion, citing a 1940 precedent.

"This is sufficient reason for us to decline at this time to review the federal questions asserted [by Bush lawyers] to be present."

The U.S. Supreme Court decision is not a victory for either Bush, who challenged the state court ruling under federal law and the U.S. Constitution, or for Vice President Al Gore, who wanted the nation's highest court either to dismiss the challenge or uphold the state court.

"As a general rule, this court defers to a state court's interpretation of a state statute," the justices said unanimously in Monday's opinion.

"But in the case of a law enacted by a state legislature applicable not only to elections to state offices, but also to the selection of presidential electors, the legislature is not acting solely under the authority given it by the people of the state, but by virtue of a direct grant of authority made under" Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

The opinion signaled a possible free pass for any new decision by the Florida Supreme Court before it again is reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

"There are expressions in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida that may be read to indicate that it construed the Florida Election Code without regard to the extent to which the Florida Constitution could, consistent with Article II … 'circumscribe the legislative power,' " the U.S. Supreme Court said Monday.

The reference to the state constitution is important. Monday's opinion specifically cites an 1892 U.S. Supreme Court decision, McPherson vs. Blacker:

To "the extent that the Legislature may enact laws regulating the electoral process, those laws are valid only if they impose no 'unreasonable or unnecessary restraints on the right of suffrage' guaranteed by the state constitution … [and because] election laws are intended to facilitate the right of suffrage, such laws must be liberally construed in favor of the citizens' right to vote ….' "

After addressing the Article II question, Monday's opinion takes up the 113-year-old federal law. The opinion seems to suggest that if a state violates that law, deciding an election dispute in a way that is not consistent with the laws in force on Election Day, then any resolution would have to come from Congress when it decides to accept or not accept a state's electoral votes, not from the federal courts.

(No. 00-836, Bush vs. Palm Beach Count Canvassing Board et al.)

Al Gore won't stop. Read NewsMax.com's urgent letter. Click Here to find out how you can help inform America about Al Gore's election theft.