Search results

Looks at the US Supreme Court's alleged loss of legitimacy as a result of Bush v. Gore to argue that such claims are greatly inflated. It is maintained that the Court's intervention in the 2000 presidential election did not involve substantive issues on a par with privacy rights or abortion. Rather, the "one-of-a-kind" decision was consistent with the Court's institutional role, ended the election dispute, & restored stability to the political system. Sociological, psychological, & legal meanings of the word legitimacy are explored by examining public attitudes toward the Court, historical periods in which the Court's authority was questioned, & theories of sources of the Court's authority. Bush v. Gore is compared to Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, in which the Court refused to reverse its precedent in Roe v. Wade on the ground that it would undermine the Court's legitimacy. Both cases involved a divisive national controversy; however, the election debate needed a final resolution, while the abortion debate remained an intensely controversial issue for decades without destroying the legitimacy of the Court. J. Lindroth