Download file to see previous pages...
a political battle ended by the federal courts as the Florida Supreme Court ordered for a state-wide recount which is later on brought to an end by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In this case, the Supreme Court resolved whether the recount is constitutional and identified a remedy once deemed unconstitutional. Within the American Judiciary, a writ of certiorari could be granted only for compelling reasons but of judicial discretion. One of the grounds cited by the judges, as per asserted in Rule 10, was the occurrence of discrepancy on the decision of Florida Supreme Court for ballot recounts. It could be recalled that in December of the same year, the Florida Supreme Court stated multiple court decisions regarding the presidential election and the process of manual recount which was mandated to be statewide and even with the appeal of Bush, were ordered for stay. Justice Scalia argued that the petitioner Gore has a substantial probability of success and a manual recount was granted in order to count the legally casted votes that may not be counted by the machine such as in cases of dimpled chad. Moreover, it was accounted by the justice that halting the process of recounting votes will inevitably shed a confusion of the legitimacy of the election. Yet the issue remains, why did the U.S. Supreme Court overturn the decision of Florida Supreme Court on its mandated recount?
The majority of the justices elected that the decision of Florida Supreme Court for state-wide manual recounting was unconstitutional as they reckon that the Florida Legislature aimed to utilize the “safe-harbor” benefits of “determination of controversy as to appointment of electors” as stated in Title 3 of the United States Code § 5. Three justices, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas, claimed that the Florida Supreme Court’s decision violated the intent of Florida legislature while seven of them concurred that there was a defiance of the Equal Protection Clause in manual counting as there has
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
The court ruled by a narrow 5-4 margin that the Arizona program promoting school choice can continue − dismissing a lawsuit waged by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of taxpayers who disliked the program.
Question 1 Facts In the case of Davis v. Washington, U.S. Supreme Court, (2006) where McCottry had been assaulted by Davis the boyfriend who had later on fled the scene. McCottry was supposed to testify for charges of felony violation of domestic order. This led to using hearsay from the 911 call recording that was made by McCottry despite Davis objection of not doing it.
The Warren Court's landmark 1963 opinion in Gideon revisited the issue confronted twenty years earlier in Betts v. Brady - the scope of an indigent defendant's constitutional entitlement to government-provided assistance in state court.
was a banner a student held up at a school event—an Olympic torch relay in Alaska—that read “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.” Because of the unusual and eye-catching sentiment expressed in the banner, and because of the debate over whether students had the right to express anything
There goal was to encourage diversity and they effectively bused children to different school districts depending on the colour of their skin. The court—which was very closely split along political and ideological lines—decided
Court and United States Congress constitutions are responsible for protecting the United States citizen’s rights against police officers’ abuses (Campbell, 2002). The United States Congress’ tasks include creating laws that ensure the citizens’ rights against illegally
She overcame adversity and secured her confirmation based upon her work merits rather than her gender. She is in effect, a female success story for a new generation.
Originally serving in the presidents
Any person accused of any crime is entitled to a fair trial to avoid administration of unjust punishment (Siegel 185). The court should conduct the trial in public “free of prejudice, passion, excitement, and tyrannical power.” In the case of Sheppard v Maxwell
The American government is divided into various arms which perform different functions. The arms include the judiciary, legislature and the executive. Every branch of the government has distinctive functions which they perform independent of the other branches. To achieve this each has their specific roles which they perform as led by their leaders.
1 Pages(250 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Recount and the U.S. Supreme Court for FREE!