Being as specific as you feel necessary, set the stage, using the facts of the Bush v. Gore case. What was the majority opinion in the case? Do you agree with the majority? Choose at least one dissenting opinion and explain the strengths and weaknesses of that dissent. Do you agree with the dissent? Why?

INFO ON THE CASE (and the documents are online as well)

Nov 7 - AP and TV declare has won the presidency but later retract as Florida is too close to call

Nov 8 - Bush is projected the winner, later retracted. Bush is 1784 ahead of Gore but FL law requires mandatory recount. Dem layers claim "butterfly ballots" are illegal.

Nov 9 - Gore seeks recounts; Katherine Harris, FL Sec of State, says all counties must complete recounts in one week - she campaigned for Bush.

Nov 10 - AP announces Bush's lead is 229

Nov 11 - Bush fils lawsuit to halt manual recounts

Nov 12 - manual recounts continue

Nov 13 - US Dist Ct Judge Middlebrooks refuses to block recount

Nov 15 - Judge Labarga rules that Palm Beach must review punch card ballots

Nov 16 - FL S Ct refuses to halt recounts

Nov 18 - with absentee, Bush's lead is 930

Nov 21 - FL S Ct unanimously rules that Harris abused discretion in deadline of Nov 26

Nov 24 - USSC agrees to heard Bush appeal of FL S Ct extending deadline

Nov 26 - Broward County finishes recount and finds additional for Gore; Gov. Jeb Bush submits 25 electoral votes for Bush

Dec 4 - in unanimous decision, USSC vacates FL S Ct and sends case back; Bush lead now 154

Dec 9 - recounts resume

Dec 11 - USSC hears oral arguments in Bush v. Gore

Dec 12 - decision announced; 5-4 decision says manual recounts violate equal protection because the standard for reviewing allows too much variation; claim that safe harbor provision must be delivered 6 days before Electoral College meeting; Court says now insufficient time for a proper recount

Dec 13 - Gore concedes to Bush

Dec 18 - Electoral College meets - 271-266 for Bush

Jan 20 - Bush takes office

Each justice's opinion:

Rehnquist: FL leg created a detailed scheme and we should follow it; rules of protest are outlined by FL statute; Sec of State has authority; punch cards were clear; to allow a recount would depart from legislative intent; following 3 USC 5, Dec 12 was the final day for determination of FL electors

Stevens: Const assigns responsibility to the states; FLSC was consistent with State and Fed; State has every right to continue counting votes until a winner; FLSC followed precedent but the USSC does NOT; "One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."

Souter: the USSC should not have reviewed the case and should not have stopped the recount; what is the federal question; not state is required to conform with 2 USC 5; all issues would have been resolved if a recount was not halted

Ginsburg: USSC should respect FL state law; the Court has historically granted deference to State courts

Breyer: no justification for the majority's remedy; no federal question