GEORGE W. BUSH et al. v. ALBERT GORE, Jr. et al. The application for stay presented to Justice Kennedy and by him referred to the Court is granted, and it is ordered that the mandate of the Florida Supreme Court, case No. SC00-2431, is hereby stayed pending further order of the Court.
Supreme Court is about to have 3 Bush v. Gore alumni sitting on the bench - CNNPolitics Supreme Court is about to have 3 Bush v. Gore alumni sitting on the bench Kavanaugh talks Bush v. Gore case (2000) More Videos ... Kavanaugh talks Bush v. Gore case (2000) 01:20
Stephen Breyer. In Bush v. Gore (2000; see United States: The Bill Clinton administration), which settled that year’s controversial presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore, he issued a passionate yet precise dissent. He argued that, by failing to refuse the case under the rubric of….
Most of you remember Bush vs. Gore in 2000 right? Just to give you a recap the 2000 election between Bush vs. Gore was decided by United States Supreme Court and ultimately sided with George Bush on a recount dispute in Florida.
"The Boies Family: Super-lawyer David Boies has been the go-to guy for legions of powerful people and institutions, including Al Gore, George Steinbrenner and CBS.
The Florida vote was ultimately settled in Bush's favor by a margin of 537 votes when the U.S. Supreme Court, in Bush v. Gore, stopped a recount that had been initiated upon a ruling by the Florida Supreme Court.
The returns showed that Bush had won Florida by such a close margin that state law required a recount. A month-long series of legal battles led to the highly controversial 5–4 Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore, which ended the recount. The recount having been ended, Bush won Florida by 537 votes, a margin of 0.009%.
Theresa LePore is a former Supervisor of Elections for Palm Beach County, Florida. She designed the infamous "butterfly ballot" used in the 2000 presidential election. This would lead the press to nickname her "Madame Butterfly".
Bush v. Gore was a case heard before the U.S. Supreme Court in which that court reversed a Florida Supreme Court request for a selective manual rec...
On December 12, 2000, in a 7–2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Florida Supreme Court’s decision that manual recounts of ballots shoul...
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bush v. Gore terminated the recount process in Florida in the U.S. presidential election of 2000. With the elect...
Bush argued that recounts in Florida violated the Equal Protection Clause because Florida did not have a statewide vote recount standard. Each county was on its own to determine whether a given ballot was an acceptable one. Two voters could have marked their ballots in an identical manner, but the ballot in one county would be counted while the ballot in a different county would be rejected, because of the conflicting manual recount standards.
Chief Justice Rehnquist's concurring opinion, joined by Justices Scalia and Thomas, began by emphasizing that this was an unusual case in which the Constitution requires federal courts to assess whether a state supreme court has properly interpreted the will of the state legislature. Usually, federal courts do not make that type of assessment, and indeed the per curiam opinion in this case did not do so. After addressing this aspect of the case, Rehnquist examined and agreed with arguments that had been made by the dissenting justices of the Florida Supreme Court.
98 (2000), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court on December 12, 2000, that settled a recount dispute in Florida's 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. On December 8, the Florida Supreme Court had ordered a statewide recount of all undervotes, over 61,000 ballots that ...
Specifically, the use of different standards of counting in different counties violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. (The case had also been argued on the basis of Article II jurisdictional grounds, which found favor with only Justices Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and William Rehnquist .)
In Bush v. Gore, on the contrary, the Court actively prevented the completion of a halted state recount, never having ruled on the merits either of the challenge or the election and never having adjudicated the validity of Bush's certification or Gore's request for a recount.
He told them the weeks preceding the decision had been "exhausting" but that he believed the process showed "the strength of our system of government.".
Thomas joined the unsigned opinion that said Florida had run out of time to recount disputed ballots without violating the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. The decision cemented the state's late November certification of a 537-vote margin for Bush over Gore (from nearly 6 million ballots cast) and gave Bush Florida's decisive electoral votes.
Barrett wrote on the questionnaire she submitted to the Senate for her Supreme Court confirmation review, "One significant case on which I provided research and briefing assistance was Bush v. Gore." She said the law firm where she was working at the time represented Bush and that she had gone down to Florida "for about a week at the outset of the litigation" when the dispute was in the Florida courts. She said she had not continued on the case after she returned to Washington.
Roberts flew to Florida in November 2000 to assist Bush's legal team. He helped prepare the lawyer who presented Bush's case to the Florida state Supreme Court and offered advice throughout.
He had been appointed in 1990 to the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals by President George H.W. Bush. At the time of Bush v. Gore, Alito was a decade into the job, writing opinions in his Newark, New Jersey, chambers and widely regarded as a possibility for the younger Bush's "short list" of Supreme Court candidates.
During Kavanaugh's Senate confirmation hearings, Democratic senators referred to his involvement in the Bush v. Gore litigation, but they did not ask him about the case.
She was nominated to the federal appeals court for the DC Circuit by Clinton in 1999, after serving his administration in senior domestic-policy positions. Later that year, Kagan become a visiting professor at the Harvard Law School.
In December 2000, Kavanaugh joined the legal team of George W. Bush, which was trying to stop the ballot recount in Florida. [58] After Bush became president in January 2001, Kavanaugh was hired as an associate by the White House Counsel, Alberto Gonzales. [41] There, Kavanaugh worked on the Enron scandal, the successful nomination of Chief Justice John Roberts, and the unsuccessful nomination of Miguel Estrada. [41] Starting in July 2003, he served as Assistant to the President and White House staff secretary, [44] succeeding Harriet Miers. [59] In that position he was responsible for coordinating all documents going to and from the president.
From 1999 to 2002, Barrett practiced law at Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, a boutique law firm for litigation in Washington, D.C., that merged with the Houston, Texas-based law firm Baker Botts in 2001. [27] [29] While at Baker Botts, she worked on Bush v. Gore, the lawsuit that grew out of the 2000 United States presidential election, providing research and briefing assistance for the firm’s representation of George W. Bush. [30] [31]
The Circuit Court denied relief, stating that Vice President Gore failed to meet his burden of proof. He appealed to the First District Court of Appeal, which certified the matter to the Florida Supreme Court. Accepting jurisdiction, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. Gore v.
On November 8, 2000, the day following the Presidential election, the Florida Division of Elections reported that petitioner, Governor Bush, had received 2,909,135 votes, and respondent, Vice President Gore, had received 2,907,351 votes, a margin of 1,784 for Governor Bush.
The application for stay presented to Justice Kennedy and by him referred to the Court is granted, and it is ordered that the mandate of the Florida Supreme Court, case No. SC00-2431, is hereby stayed pending further order of the Court.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh also played a role in Bush v. Gore — meaning that if Barrett is confirmed, three of the nine justices will have participated in litigation related to the only presidential contest to be decided by the high court. “Here we are, two decades after Bush v.
An unknown fact is that Chief Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, Justices Brett Kavanaugh , and Amy Coney Barrett were all Bush’s attorneys.
The oral argument in Bush v. Gore occurred on December 11. Theodore Olson, a Washington, D.C., lawyer, delivered Bush's oral argument. New York lawyer David Boies argued for Gore.
During the brief period when the U.S. Supreme Court was deliberating on Bush v. Gore, the Florida Supreme Court provided clarifications of its November 21 decision in Palm Beach County Canvassing Board v. Harris (Harris I), which the U.S. Supreme Court had requested on Decembe…
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is the U.S. Constitutional provision on which the decision in Bush v. Gore was based.
Article II, § 1, cl. 2 of the Constitution specifies the number of electors per state, and, most relevant to this case, specifies the manner in which those electors are selected, stipulating that:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Elec…
In brief, the breakdown of the decision was:
• Seven justices agreed that there was an Equal Protection Clause violation in using differing standards of determining a valid vote in different counties, causing an "unequal evaluation of ballots in various respects". The per curiam opinion (representing the views of Justices Kennedy, O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas) specifically cited that:
Bush v. Gore prompted many strong reactions from scholars, pundits and others regarding the Court's decision, with a majority of publications in law reviews being critical. An analysis in The Georgetown Law Journal found that 78 scholarly articles were published about the case between 2001 and 2004, with 35 criticizing the decision and 11 defending it.
The most closely decided aspect of the case was the key question of what remedy the Court sh…