Would the Majority Have Stopped the Hand Count if Gore Had Been Ahead?

Alan M. Dershowitz

in Supreme Injustice

Published in print January 2003 | ISBN: 9780195158076
Published online November 2003 | e-ISBN: 9780199869848 | DOI:
Would the Majority Have Stopped the Hand Count if Gore Had Been Ahead?

Show Summary Details


Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US constitutional system in ways that it had never been tested before, and did so not because of incompetence, but because of malice aforethought. The author states that he is convinced that if it had been Bush rather than Gore who needed the Florida recount in order to have any chance of winning the election, that at least some of the five justices who voted to stop the recount would instead have voted to allow it to proceed. The main sections of the chapter are: Judicial Impropriety; Hypothetical Cases Involving a Supreme Court Decision Regarding a Presidential Election; The Difficulty of Proving an Improper Motive; Academic Defenders of the Majority Justices; Ad Hominem Arguments and Analysis of Motive; and Analysing the Justices’ Motives in Bush vs Gore: A Prelude.

Keywords: academic defence; Ad Hominem Arguments; analysis of motives; George W. Bush; Bush vs Gore; election recount; Florida; Florida recount; Al Gore; Hypothetical Cases; improper motives; Judicial Impropriety; motives; US constitution; US justices’ motives; US presidential election 2000; US Supreme Court; USA

Chapter.  8480 words. 

Subjects: US Politics

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.