interesting

[Mark Tushnet]

Right -- but is it the executive in her coerced capacity under threat of
contempt, or the executive in her capacity as a person of independent
judgment?

----- Original Message -----
From: "John C. Eastman" <jeastman at CHAPMAN.EDU>
Date: Thursday, November 30, 2000 7:59 pm
Subject: Re: interesting

> 3 USC sec. 6 answers this, and it is the slate of electors that
> has already
> been certified by the secretary of state -- the executive official
> assignedthat task pursuant to Florida law.  All the governor does
> is "communicate"
> that certification to the Congress.
> -- John Eastman
>
> Mark Tushnet wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure that anyone should take any of these questions
> seriously,> but I would think that the voters of Connecticut would
> have some reason
> > to be concerned about the recusal of Senator Lieberman in a way that
> > Florida voters would not about that of Governor Bush, given the
> > availability of a "back-up" in the latter but not the former
> case.  (The
> > relevant statute refers, I think, to "the executive" of the
> state, not
> > its governor.  Here's the scenario I've imagined:  Acting under
> > compulsion of an order from the Florida Supreme Court, Secretary of
> > State Harris certifies Gore's electors; in a separate act, she
> > communicates her belief that Bush's electors were regularly and
> validly> elected.  In the event that the issue arises, which
> certification is the
> > one from the state's executive?)
>
>