Hayes v Tilden Election (1876)
Tilden (democrat): needs one more electoral vote
Hayes (republican): needs 4 more electoral votes
problem w/ getting the electors from 4 states left
Hayes v Tilden Election (1876)
results
Hayes wins bc due to the drama Congress created the Electoral Count Act of 1887
Electoral Count Act of 1887
established methods for counting votes and handling competing slates of electors
established Safe Harbor Provision: a state must select its electors 35 days after the election, (6 days bf electoral college convenes)
Florida 2000 election
Nov 7: networks believe FL is going to vote for Gore, then they retract and say Bush then retracted again
Nov 8: Bush led FL by 1700 votes / 6 mill votes
Gore is winning the popular vote, just needs FL electoral votes to win
Palm Beach County “butterfly ballot“
extra large ballot made for the old pop so they can see
there is issues w/ the ballot that causes 2700 votes to go for the independent Pat Buchanan
First Recounts
bc the margin was so little they had an automatic state recount of all FL ballots
Bush lead went from 1700 to 327 votes
Gore→ protested by and requested a recount of 4 most populous democratic counties
Volusia
Nov 13: Volusia County was the only one who completed their recount, finding 388 votes for Bush
FL certification laws were confusing
all missing counties shall be ignored and the results shown by the returns on file shall be certified
such returns may be ignored and the results on file at the time may be certified
Secretary of State Harris v FL SC
Nov 14, announced she would certify the results (even though 3 other counties were not done)
FL SC said no and extended certification deadline to Nov 26
Harris certifies any way, Bush wins
Dec 4, US SC canceled the FL SC decision and sent for reconsideration
Dec 8 FL SC tells all courts to manually recount 60,000 undervotes statewide (the chads)
how the FL SC allow Gore to continue his election challenge
they ordered the recount of 60,000 undervotes
US SC emergency motion
what emergency ruling did the SC make on Dec 9 that basically decided the election for Bush
5/4 stop the recounts until the court decides the issues of the case
what was significant about the Dec 12 deadline
the day SC issued their decision
it was the Statutory Safe Harbor Deadline
Bush v Gore (2000)
Dec 12 holding
Rehnquist opinion
stop the recount permanently, the recount lacks standards and violates the Equal Protection clause
it also would not be done by the harbor deadline
Art 2 provision which allowed the US supreme court to reverse FL decision
each state’s electors must be chosen in in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct
claimed the FL court was rewriting/ignoring state election statue provisions → acting in defiance to the consitution
Gore’s response to Art 2 provision
said the state court was not rewriting the law but interpreting it
Argument of FL SC violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment
it did not require uniform standards in the recount, some counties were counting the ballots one way and some were counting it another
equal protection clause
14th amendment sec 1
no state shall deny any person w/in its jurisdiction to the equal protection of the law
use of equal protection
usually by democrats
republicans use in this case to give Bush the win
bush v gore (2000)
steven dissent
this decision goes against traditionally affairs, usually they stick to the highest court of the States to provide the final answer regarding election laws
Gore’s response to the election
make sure no one trashes the court
this is america we must but the country bf party
i disagree but i accept it
Independent State Legislature Theory
Rehnquist’s concurrence
Art 2 provision: each state shall appoint in such a manner as the legislature thereof may direct, electors for president and vice pres
there are exceptional cases in which the Constitution imposes the duty or confers a power on a particular brach of state’s gov
Moore v Harper (tbd)
facts, NC SC resolution of the challenge to the congressional map
NC SC for the first time invalidated a congressional map bc they said it was gerrymandered
“all elections shall be free“
court ordered experts to draw a new map
Moore v Harper (tbd)
question presented
whether a state’s judicial branch can invalidate regulations governing the manner holding elections prescribed by the legislature by devising their own regulations based on vague state constitutional provisions
Moore v Harper (tbd)
issue distilled - independent state legislature
how much can state courts interpret/change state election law?
what if courts misinterpret the law
what if legislatures gerrymander
Moore v Harper (tbd)
independent state legislature theory
under the constitution, only the legislature has the power to regulate federal elections w/out interference from state courts
NC SC ordered experts to create a new map, legislative job taken over
Moore v Harper (tbd)
NC democrats argument against the map
the new map would allow Republicans to pick up 2 more seats in Congress - gerrymandering that violated the state’s constiution
Moore v Harper (tbd)
republican worst fear
courts are rewriting the law
Moore v Harper (tbd)
democrats worst fear
SC will eliminate state judicial review of elections
stopping state courts from reviewing legislative maps and ending redistricting legislation
stop state courts from reviewing any action of the state legislature pertaining to elections
Independent State Legislature
Amar brothers and Ramsey
amar brothers: believe Bush v Gore is completely wrong, going to far
rasmey maps: state courts are going to far but the state legislator is going to far by not following the state constitution
issue does not have precedent in the court