newyorker: On the tenth anniversary of Bush v. Gore, Jeffrey Toobin looks at the Supreme Court case that “damaged the Court’s honor”: “What made the decision in Bush v. Gore so startling was that it was the work of Justices who were considered, to greater or lesser extents, judicial conservatives. On many occasions, these Justices had said that they believed in the preëminence of states’ rights, in a narrow conception of the equal-protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and, above all, in judicial restraint. Bush v. Gore violated those principles. The Supreme Court stepped into the case even though the Florida Supreme Court had been interpreting Florida law; the majority found a violation of the rights of George W. Bush, a white man, to equal protection when these same Justices were becoming ever more stingy in finding violations of the rights of African-Americans; and the Court stopped the recount even before it was completed, and before the Florida courts had a chance to iron out any problems—a classic example of judicial activism, not judicial restraint, by the majority.” Toobin will be talking with readers about the case and the Court at 3 PM ET. Join him. Toobin’s book The Nine, must read!

newyorker:

On the tenth anniversary of Bush v. Gore, Jeffrey Toobin looks at the Supreme Court case that “damaged the Court’s honor”:


“What made the decision in Bush v. Gore so startling was that it was the work of Justices who were considered, to greater or lesser extents, judicial conservatives. On many occasions, these Justices had said that they believed in the preëminence of states’ rights, in a narrow conception of the equal-protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and, above all, in judicial restraint. Bush v. Gore violated those principles. The Supreme Court stepped into the case even though the Florida Supreme Court had been interpreting Florida law; the majority found a violation of the rights of George W. Bush, a white man, to equal protection when these same Justices were becoming ever more stingy in finding violations of the rights of African-Americans; and the Court stopped the recount even before it was completed, and before the Florida courts had a chance to iron out any problems—a classic example of judicial activism, not judicial restraint, by the majority.”


Toobin will be talking with readers about the case and the Court at 3 PM ET. Join him.

Toobin’s book The Nine, must read!

Recent comments

Blog comments powered by Disqus

Notes

  1. abusivezit44 reblogged this from markcoatney
  2. sysrick reblogged this from newyorker
  3. silas216 reblogged this from liberalsarecool
  4. executivebeard reblogged this from princessjinx
  5. princessjinx reblogged this from newyorker
  6. girlgoesgrrr reblogged this from newyorker
  7. a-light-outside reblogged this from newyorker
  8. christopherangel reblogged this from brooklynmutt
  9. bearsandotherthings reblogged this from newyorker
  10. liveinyoursleep reblogged this from newyorker
  11. timekiller-s reblogged this from liberalsarecool and added:
    “Judicial activism” is a code word for MOMMY MOMMY BEAT UP THE BAD MAN I DIDN’T GET MY WAY!
  12. anokarina reblogged this from newyorker
  13. legallypresent reblogged this from tinytortfeasor
  14. transpondster reblogged this from newyorker and added:
    This case, as damaging as...revisited on a regular basis.
  15. theknowledgeeater reblogged this from newyorker
  16. ttfe reblogged this from brooklynmutt and added:
    It’s been ten years since Bush v. Gore. Omg I’m old…? That really doesn’t make sense to me. Feels like yesterday. Sounds...
  17. thatandycohen reblogged this from markcoatney