Sandra Day O'Connor told Chicago Tribune: 'Maybe' Bush v. Gore Was a Mistake

[LegalScholar]

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: 'Maybe' Bush v. Gore Was a Mistake

by Brad Friedman

"Maybe"? Ya think?! From Chicago Tribune, on their recent interview with former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor about 2000's infamous Bush v. Gore case...

Looking back, O'Connor said, she isn't sure the high court should have taken the case.
"It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," O'Connor said during a talk Friday with the Tribune editorial board. "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it, goodbye.'"

The case, she said, "stirred up the public" and "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation."

"Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."

"Probably"?! Ya think?! The paper goes on to explain that O'Connor's "vote in the 5-4 Bush v. Gore decision effectively gave Republican George W. Bush a victory over his Democratic opponent, then-Vice President Al Gore." That, after the U.S. Supreme Court had stopped the public hand-counting of the votes cast by the people of Florida.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=9988

[Bluzmann57]

1. "PROBABLY the SC added to the problem"?!

Ain't no probably about it. The SC will forever be scarred by that idiotic decision, in which the winner did not win and the USA was damn near ruined forever. Probably? Hah!

[rurallib]

2. well, once the Kochs own the Trib

stuff like this will never see the light of day.

[LegalScholar]

3. To rurallib

I would say it wouldn't make much difference... The paper has been conservative for years...

[rurallib]

4. Tis true -

once it had a 19th century editorial board and liberal writers. But last time I saw one it was pretty much fishwrap.