Stevens in Bush v. Gore

Lest we forget:

What must underlie petitioners’ entire federal assault on the Florida election procedures is an unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed. Otherwise, their position is wholly without merit. The endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land. It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today’s decision. 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.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000) (Stevens, J., dissenting).

One comment

  1. Glad you brought this up. It’s still the best rebuttal to Renquist’s 298 page “Because we said so” majority opinion on this case.

%d bloggers like this: