Suchergebnisse

Gives the US Supreme Court "two & a half cheers" for its actions in Bush v. Gore, maintaining that the loss of a half cheer was due to their failure to render a bipartisan consensus on the remand issue, which tarnished both the Court & the Bush presidency. Even though Bush probably would have won the recount in FL, & the FL Supreme Court placed the US Supreme Court in an awkward position, the US Court was correct in finding that a standardless recount would violate the 14th Amendment. However, it is contended that the outcome would have been more legitimate if the majority of the justices had joined Justices Souter & Breyer in requiring a remand under strict constitutional standards. The constitutional problem involved in the unequal treatment of identical voters is discussed, along with the often dubious strategies of both Al Gore & George W. Bush's legal teams; much criticism could have been avoided if Gore's position had been a little fairer, & Bush's position a little more accommodating. J. Lindroth

Illustrated by the pending rate case, Duquesne Light Company v. Barasch, filed by two Pennsylvania utilities.

TRADITIONAL JURISPRUDENTIAL CONSERVATIVES, WITH THEIR FOCUS ON JUDICIAL RESTRAINT; LIBERTARIANS, WITH THEIR COMMITMENT TO INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES AND HOSTILITY TO BIG GOVERNMENT; THE LAW AND ECONOMICS MOVEMENT, WITH ITS RIGOROUS PURSUIT OF ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY; AND SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES, WITH THEIR ATTACHMENT TO COMMUNITY AND TRADITIONAL MORAL VALUES-EACH OF THESE FOUR SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT HAS DEVELOPED A DISTINCT SET OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES. EACH IS A CHALLENGE AND A THREAT TO THE STILL-POWERFUL LEFT-LIBERAL ORTHODOXY; EACH HAS AN UNEASY RELATION WITH ITS ALLIES ON THE RIGHT.