Beliefnet
TALLAHASSEE, Fla., Nov. 20 (AP) -- As one of the closest presidential elections in history hangs in the balance, George W. Bush and Al Gore concentrated on seven ``votes'' that could decide the outcome -- those of the justices of the Florida Supreme Court.

The stakes -- both legal and political -- were enormous in Monday's courtroom showdown.

The proceedings were carried live on the major television networks, providing Americans with a brief lesson in constitutional and election law. There was no indication when the justices might rule.

Two former secretaries of state, Warren Christopher and James A. Baker III, sat listening intently in the courtroom in their capacity as representatives of the two White House rivals.

``All eyes are on Tallahassee,'' said Bush campaign spokesman Ari Fleischer as lawyers for both camps mounted what could be their last, best chance to influence the election outcome.

Some political analysts and legal scholars believe the state's high court may be the one to write the final chapter to this extraordinary American political cliffhanger.

The federal judiciary already has shown a disinclination to inject itself into the dispute. An appeals court in Atlanta last Friday rejected Bush's request for an immediate end to ballot recounts Gore has requested in Democratic-leaning Florida counties, saying it saw no reason to step in.

And the likelihood that the U.S. Supreme Court would review the Florida decision is somewhere between ``nil'' and ``remote,'' suggested New York University law professor Stephen Gillers.

``It's nil if the state court rules against Gore. I don't think he'll appeal. His brief didn't introduce any federal issues. If the state court rules against Bush, I think the Bush team will wait to see what the recount is likely to show before taking an appeal to the Supreme Court,'' Gillers said.

And if the Bush team does appeal, ``the chance of getting a discretionary review from the Supreme Court is remote,'' Gillers added. ``I don't think the Supreme Court will be eager to get involved in answering what Bush says are the federal issues.''

Thirteen days of legal maneuvering and posturing by both camps came to a head Monday as Florida's Supreme Court entertained arguments in the case.

Bush wants the justices -- all chosen by Democratic governors -- to stop the manual recounts of ballots in Broward, Palm Beach and Miami-Dade counties. Gore wants them to continue.

The justices listened to arguments for about 2 1/2 hours Monday, frequently asking questions on the legality of manual recounts under way, but giving no indication as to how, or when, they would rule.

Chief Justice Charles T. Wells seemed particularly interested in knowing how long the state had to certify a winner in time to be counted when the Electoral College meets on Dec. 18 to elect the next president -- perhaps suggesting an inclination to allow the hand counts to play out.

``We have a long-standing policy ... that says the real interests here are the voters,'' Wells declared.

Democrats suggested Dec. 12 was the latest the election could be certified -- a delay the Bush team clearly found distasteful.

Still, ``I think that's the day it will be done,'' Erwin Chermerinsky, a political science professor at the University of Southern California, said after Monday's hearing.

If the high court says Secretary of State Katherine Harris was wrong to try to certify the election results with Bush ahead, the counts could go on, with Gore hoping to pick up enough votes to overcome Bush's statewide lead of 930 votes.

The Supreme Court hearing played out while recounts were under way in Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties, all largely Democratic jurisdictions.

Hearing arguments touched on the possibility of a statewide recount, on the standards in use in the recounts, on the acknowledged contradictions in Florida state law and on the conflict between Florida statute and federal law.

There was argument, as well, over voter intent - an issue of paramount importance, given the number of questionable ballots in the recount counties.

``The court is certainly aware of the historic nature of this session,'' said Wells as the afternoon session began, ``and is aware that this is a matter of utmost and vital importance to our nation our state and our world.''

Both sides left open the possibility of additional steps should the high court decision go against them. But each team also recognized that the Florida ruling could be the final determination on Florida's 25 electoral votes -- and with them, the presidential election.

Thomas Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, suggested a less-than-clear cut ruling could prolong the dispute.

``The justices could rule very narrowly. They basically could ask the secretary of state to let hand counts continue and allow her to make a decision again,'' he said. ``We could end up going through more litigation in the state Supreme Court.''

Join the Discussion
comments powered by Disqus