Thirty-Six Days of Turmoil: George W. Bush and the 2000 Election

Florida Supreme Court

On Thursday, December 7, the Florida Supreme Court began hearing arguments on Gore’s appeal of Judge Sauls’ decision to not require the hand recounts to continue. David Boies began his argument that nowhere in Article II of the United States Constitution barred state courts from interpretations laws about presidential elections because the founders never intended legislatures to be both the legislative and judicial body in regards to elections. However, Chief Justice Charles T. Wells questioned Boies, echoing the concerns of Justice Sauls, that if the court allows for recount to take place, he felt it opened the door for other candidates to use Gore’s argument of under and over-votes to require a recount, but Boies refuted this claim stating that they had pinpointed 215 votes in Palm Beach and 168 votes in Miami-Dade to be considered for recount.

On Friday, December 8, the Florida Supreme Court had made a decision and was set to issue their ruling. In a 4-3 decision, the Florida Supreme Court overturned the ruling by Judge Saul. “The majority easily agreed on several specifics. Gore should have received the 215 net votes that were submitted late from Palm Beach…the court also gave Gore the 168 net votes from the partial recount in Miami-Dade…In light of the ruling Bush’s lead in the state fell from 537 to 154 votes.”25 In another shocking decision, the court echoed the Republican claim that Gore had selected recounts to occur in counties that he would gain votes, so the court ordered that all 60,000 under votes statewide be recounted, even though Gore had only asked votes be counted in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach. With the court shockingly ruling in favor of Gore and authorizing a statewide recount, the Bush legal team immediately appeals the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, who approved the appeal in a 5-4 decision and issued all recounts be stopped.

Bush v. Gore

On Monday, December 11, the United States Supreme Court heard arguments on behalf of Ted Olson, representing Bush, and David Boise, representing Gore on Bush’s appeal of the December 8 decision by the Florida Supreme Court. Ted Olson understood that the Supreme Court was in favor of his argument because the court had given him five votes in granting him the stay to halt all recounts; all he had to do was keep the coalition. Olson returned to the original narrow interpretation of Article II stating that the U.S. Constitution is clear that only the state legislature, and not the state courts, could make rules for presidential elections, but it was not an argument supported by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court’s swing vote. Olson then quickly changed his argument to suggest that federal law strictly prohibited Florida from changing the rules of the vote counting after the ballots had been cast. Boise, as he had done in front of the Florida Supreme Court, argued that all disputed votes must be counted the ensure the intent of the voter be granted. With both sides giving, competent, yet uninspired arguments, William Daley agreed with Olson, with nothing in the oral arguments suggesting any of the justices would change their minds, the fives votes that granted the stay appeared to be victory for Bush.

On Tuesday, December 12, the United States Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision overturned the Florida Supreme Court’s ruling. The court majority of Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia argued that the Florida Supreme Court in ordering the statewide recount had usurped the role that Article II assigned to the state legislature. Justice Kennedy and Justice O’Connor concerned with the court’s ruling to overturn the Florida decision but where unsure of what grounds. The court majority argued that due to the recount deadline being set for December 12, there was no time to send it back the state legislature to determine set standards for the recounts. The court minority, Justice Breyer, Souter, Stevens and Ginsburg, in their dissent invoked the principle of fairness, arguing that the recount had stopped on December 9 when the stay was granted, three days before the deadline, thus the court was obligated to grant and extension of three days and send the case back to the State of Florida. With no other outlets to pursue recounts left, on Wednesday, December 9, 2000, Al Gore officially conceded the Presidential Election of 2000 to George W. Bush at 9 p.m.

Conclusion

While on the surface it appeared that the Election of 2000, especially the election in Florida, would prevent any candidate from claiming a mandate and thus forcing whoever was elected president to remain center of the political spectrum. However, due to having key elected officials, such as his brother Governor Jeb Bush and Secretary of State Katherine Harris, to ensure the election process would work in favor of Bush, network executives, such as his cousin John Ellis with Fox, who would ignore statistical data to set off other networks in making faulty decisions for a Bush victory, and judges both in Florida and the United States Supreme Court who used political loyalty and not law to determine election results, George W. Bush had confidence in a victory in Florida and was thus able to look at key victories in New Hampshire and Tennessee to make the claim that the voters were in favor of his policies and gave him a political mandate to achieve such policies.

Works Cited

Christopher P. Banks, The Final Arbiter (New York: State University of New York Press, 2005)

Alan M. Dershowits, Supreme Injustice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001)

David W. Moore, How to Steal an Election: The Inside Story of How George W. Bush’s Brother and Fox News Network Miscalled the 2000 Election and Changed the Course of History (New York: Avalon Publishing Group, Inc., 2006)

Julian M. Pleasants, Hanging Chads: The Inside Story of the 2000 Presidential Recount in Florida (New York: Palgrave MacMillian, 2004)

Richard A. Posner, Breaking the Deadlock (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2001)

Clarke Rountree, Judging the Supreme Court (East Lansing, Michigan State University Press, 2007)

Jeffrey Toobin, Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election (New York: Random House, 2001)

Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008)

Deadlock: The Inside Story of America’s Closest Election (New York: Perseus Books Group, 2001)

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election, 2001 (Washington, D.C., GPO, 2001)

1.) Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008), p. 4.

2.) Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008), p. 7.

3.) Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008), p. 7.

4.) Deadlock: The Inside Story of America’s Closest Election (New York: Perseus Books Group, 2001), p. 23.

5.) Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008), p. 2.

6.) Deadlock: The Inside Story of America’s Closest Election (New York: Perseus Books Group, 2001), p. 41.

7.) Deadlock: The Inside Story of America’s Closest Election (New York: Perseus Books Group, 2001), p. 42.

8.) Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008), p. 3.

9.)[9] Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008), p. 3.

10.) Deadlock: The Inside Story of America’s Closest Election (New York: Perseus Books Group, 2001), p. 46.

11.) Charles L. Zelden, Bush v. Gore: Exposing the Hidden Crisis in American Democracy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008), p. 3-4.

12.) David W. Moore, How to Steal an Election: The Inside Story of How George W. Bush’s Brother and Fox News Network Miscalled the 2000 Election and Changed the Course of History (New York: Avalon Publishing Group, Inc., 2006), p. 50.

13.) David W. Moore, How to Steal an Election: The Inside Story of How George W. Bush’s Brother and Fox News Network Miscalled the 2000 Election and Changed the Course of History (New York: Avalon Publishing Group, Inc., 2006), p. 51.

14.) David W. Moore, How to Steal an Election: The Inside Story of How George W. Bush’s Brother and Fox News Network Miscalled the 2000 Election and Changed the Course of History (New York: Avalon Publishing Group, Inc., 2006), p. 53.

15.) David W. Moore, How to Steal an Election: The Inside Story of How George W. Bush’s Brother and Fox News Network Miscalled the 2000 Election and Changed the Course of History (New York: Avalon Publishing Group, Inc., 2006), p. 60-70.

16.) U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election, 2001 (Washington, D.C., GPO, 2001), 26.

17.) U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election, 2001 (Washington, D.C., GPO, 2001), 26.

18.) U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election, 2001 (Washington, D.C., GPO, 2001), 27.

19.) U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election, 2001 (Washington, D.C., GPO, 2001), 29.

20.) Jeffrey Toobin, Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election (New York: Random House, 2001), p. 27.

21.) Jeffrey Toobin, Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election (New York: Random House, 2001), p. 29.

22.) Jeffrey Toobin, Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election (New York: Random House, 2001), p. 33.

23.) Jeffrey Toobin, Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election (New York: Random House, 2001), p. 236.