|
|
|
|
|
From "Good Morning America" Online Chat:
Alan Dershowitz at 4:18pm ET, December 8, 2000
I think there's almost no chance that the Supreme Court will reverse this [The Florida Supreme Court Bush v. Gore] decision. There's much more of a chance that the Florida Legislature will try to.
From "CourtTV" Online Chat:
Alan Dershowitz, December 13, 2000
Alan Dershowitz: This is a sad day for America. The man who got the most votes throughout the United States and also in Florida has lost, because he was short one vote in the United States Supreme Court. The five justices who voted for Bush last night simply preferred that he be the president and voted their own party line rather than on any principle. The Supreme Court will not recover from this self-inflicted wound until every member of the majority is no longer on the court...
This is a sad day for America. The man who got the most votes throughout the United States and also in Florida has lost, because he was short one vote in the United States Supreme Court. The five justices who voted for Bush last night simply preferred that he be the president and voted their own party line rather than on any principle. The Supreme Court will not recover from this self-inflicted wound until every member of the majority is no longer on the court...
niceout asks: Please tell me how Prof. Dershowitz goes on TV this morning and embarrasses himself, his university and his party? His attack on the US Supreme Court was out of bounds!
What appalls me most are people who think that the Supreme Court must be revered and defended regardless of its decisions and its violation of principle. The rule of law requires that we obey the Supreme Court, not that we revere it, defend it, or rally around it. In a democracy no institution must be above criticism, especially an un-elected institution. I will continue to criticize, expose, and attack the supreme court for its intellectual dishonesty, its double standards, and its partisan opinions. I do not speak for my university, or my party. (I have no party, I am an independent.) I speak only for myself.
Court TV-TIME Host asks: Where will this decision stand in the history of Supreme Court jurisprudence?
In the same general category as Plessy v. Ferguson and other decisions which compromised the moral standing of the United States Supreme Court. This is a self-inflicted wound which will take a long time to heal. It will never heal so long as the current majority of the court remains on the court. It will take new justices with less partisan agendas to restore the court to its moral authority. This perhaps is the greatest tragedy of yesterday's decision.
From "The World Today" Transcript:
Alan Dershowitz at 12:34, January 30, 2001
This is the first time in modern American history that both houses are controlled by conservative Republicans, the presidency is controlled by a Republican, the Supreme Court is controlled by Republicans, most state legislatures are controlled by Republicans, most state judiciaries are controlled by Republicans. So what Bush is doing is wrong, dead wrong, unconstitutional but he may prevail.
The Supreme Court has done the bidding of this administration, they've proved it already in the election case. And I don't think that a majority of the Supreme Court is going to strike down Bush's major campaign initiative. They should, but they won't.
MICHAEL CAREY: How strong is the precedent here for rejecting government programs if they go into the private sphere, if they go into religion?
Very, very strong. The precedents clearly, at this point, favour striking down these kinds of initiatives as unconstitutional but the Supreme Court has shown its willingness to break precedent when partisan considerations apply. So I have very little trust in the Supreme Court as an institution when it comes to issues like this.
From "Supreme Injustice" The Book:
Alan Dershowitz at 12:34, January 30, 2001
Never before in American history has a presidential election been decided by the Supreme Court. Never before in American history have so many law professors, historians, political scientists, Supreme Court litigators, journalists who cover the high court, and other experts -- at all points along the political spectrum -- been in agreement that the majority decision of the court was not only "bad constitutional law" but "lawless," "illegitimate," "unprincipled," "partisan," "fraudulent," "disingenuous," and motivated by improper considerations. In addition to the remarkable expert consensus regarding this case, there is also widespread popular outrage at what the high court did... Moreover, the furor within the Supreme Court itself -- among some justices and law clerks -- is unprecedented in the annals of this usually harmonious institution.
HERO: Linda McCabe - Fighter and Sponsor
HERO: "John Doe" - Heavenly Hall Pass
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
© 2000-2001 gorewon2000.net and coup2k.com. All rights reserved. Permission is given for individuals and non-profit web sites to copy and distribute articles provided herein in their original and unaltered form, provided attribution to this site is included. For-profit or print media seeking rights to publish or reprint content should send inquiries to thediva@coup2k.com
Fair Use Notice: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving similar information for research and educational purposes. See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|
|
|
|
|
