|
Jim,
In regards to my last post, I was talking about the context of the rulings, IE the first ruling was based on extending the deadline for the election certification. This case is regarding the contest phase, a different matter.
I have read those, and I am more inclined to agree with the majority ruling obviously. We'll see how our republican friends in the US Supreme Court see it, and I have my guesses as to that. Reading page 44 for example, it strikes me that basically, you have people taking a set of laws and rulings and forming different opinions. This judge for example, seems more concerned with the possibility of constitutional crisis and whether there was an arbitrary threshold they had established. The majority go to the law and emphasise the points regarding voter integrity and making sure the voters are all counted, IE why the statewide recount was ordered. You have them both quoting section 102.168(3) c and drawing different conclusions.
He also feels that there is no way to get the recount done on time. That opinion is obviously not shared by the majority or Judge Lewis, who wants it done in two days.
He also raises concerns about the individual criteria canvassing boards can use, something I agree with. Problem is, these are the standards that the legislature has put into Florida law, so there isn't anything you can do about that.
The other ones basically feel the threshold had not been met. The last few pages say that the remedy would be to do exactly what they did, but they don't feel the time is there to do it. I find that funny because they are the ones who extended and set the deadline in the first place so that there would be "enough time for a contest."
|