Do we have a chance in Seminole County FL with Judge Clark?

[Will Beararms]

Word on the street is many counties in FL don't even use the identification numbers on ballot applications. Is Judge Clark gonna rule in the Dem's favor. If she does, will there be time for an appeal so the FL Legislature can save our Republic and do the right thing?

 

[Tshoes]

Seminole

Will, there is no problem in Seminole,,,,,,,,
There was no tampering with ballots, only writing correct absentee voters ballot numbers on them.
The ballots themselves were not changed or altered in any way.
The worst that can come of this is a bunch of NOISE from the gorewh****., and the people who did so can be fined.
So, don't sweat the small stuff, just hope the Supremes don't decide to pull a Florida activist routine, and stop the legislature from calling a special session.......if this goes down, and the non voted ballots get a recount......then all bets are off............look for Mr. Pres ALGOR.........

 

[Will Beararms]

If I am not mistaken, The FL Supreme Court nor the US Supreme Court can prevent a State Legislature from acting. Correct me if I am mistaken.

 

[Glock-A-Roo]

From a legal perspective:
My understanding about the Seminole County case is that while the activities involved were questionable, it is
highly unlikely that throwing out all the votes is the allowable legal remedy.

Although the local Dem who brought the suit is certainly asking for all the votes to be discarded, the buzz from
about 90% of the legal commentary I've seen is that such relief is frankly laughable. At most, the involved parties
would be fined and verbally lashed in the ruling.

Legal commentators note that the "offense" involved only the absentee applications (instead of the ballots), there is
no evidence whatsoever of outright fraud, the questionable activities did not affect the absentee vote tally at all, and the "intent of the voter" theme mandated by the FLSC and trumpeted by Gore precludes tossing out the votes.

It has also been pointed out more than once that even if the judge did rule to toss the votes, such a judgement would be immediately appealed and unlikely to stand.

The Seminole story is being pushed hard by the media but is seen as small potatoes by most qualified legal commentators.

From a political perspective:
There has been much handwringing among Repubs about the Seminole case judge. They note that she is a liberal black who was turned down by Jeb Bush for a job in the appellate courts. They say this is a great opportunity for her to "stick it to the man".

Look at it this way though: with this background, if she effectively overturns a certified presidential election of the governor's brother, she will be in a world of political hurt. She will be blacklisted and pilloried in Fla to an amazing extent. She knows she can forget any hope of further advancement or acceptance among her peers.

When you combine the legal and political pressures that work against throwing out the Seminole absentee votes, it seems highly unlikely that she'll buck all that to "make a statement". Never underestimate a democrat's political
self-interest. Many "noble causes" get abandoned in light of it.

---
"You can lead a democrat to knowledge but you can't make them think."

 

[papercut]

Will,

There are certain things that the state & federal courts can make the legislature do, and certain things they can't. The three branches of government are co-equal (at least in theory). The courts (under the authority of the state or federal Supreme Court) can rule laws invalid either by declaring them unconstitutional or simply refusing to convict someone under them.

However, one of the things the state (and federal) courts cannot do is to interfere with a U.S. Constitutional process. In the current situation, the federal Constitution explicitly gives state legislatures the power to decide how electors are chosen (Article II, Section 1). The Florida legislature could pass a new law that (if signed by the governor, and by my reading of the Constitution his signature isn't really required anyway) said electors would be chosen by drawing names out of a hat while riding 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea at Disney World. That would be a perfectly valid exercise of their powers, and there isn't diddlysh!t that the courts could do about it. The courts could throw a hissy fit and try to bully the legislature into changing the law, but the legislature would not be obligated to do so. The legislators who helped pass the law also probably would not get reelected, which points out the fact that, in the end, we the people have the ultimate "veto" over the legislature.