Another Constitutional Moment?
rbarnett at BU.EDU
Sat Jan 20 19:03:18 PST 2001
All of this misses the symmetry I raised in my previous post: That, by
intervening, the Supreme Court may have STOPPED the election from being
stolen by Democratic election counters creating votes for Al Gore from
nonvotes for President. Had it not intervened and Al Gore had "won" the
umpteenth recount, millions of people would have perceived the election
having been "stolen." Only these are the millions not well represented
among con law professors.
Which "stolen election" scenario is the true one will never be known.
(Sounds like a Star Trek episode, doesn't it?)
What we do know is that there are many people with a strong interest in
declaring this election to have been illegitimate regardless of whether it
was or was not (as there would have been in the alternate scenario as well).
Does this not argue for some humility in asserting whether the election was
"stolen" by those who are willing to resist partisan rants?
Randy E. Barnett
Austin B. Fletcher Professor
Boston University School of Law
765 Commonwealth Ave.
Boston, MA 02215
mailto:rbarnett at bu.edu
(617) 353-3099 (phone)
(617) 353-3077 (fax)
http://www.bu.edu/rbarnett/SOL.htm (Structure of Liberty page)
http://www.LysanderSpooner.org (Lysander Spooner Website)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for con law professors
> [mailto:CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu]On Behalf Of Paul Finkelman
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 3:17 PM
> To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> Subject: Re: Another Constitutional Moment?
> Actually many people won't and that is the problem. As I have said a
> number of times on this list the issue is not who won or who is happy
> and who is sad, but rather the perception that the election was stolen;
> that Sandra Day O'Connor cares more about her blessed retirement than
> legitimate supreme court opinions; that the court has disgraced itself.
> Had the count gone forward and Bush won Florida then Rick could not only
> be happy, but also know that he had gained his happiness fair and
> square. That is the issue.
> Rick Duncan wrote:
> > Paul is right that a number of law professors
> > testified that Bork was out of the mainstream. Indeed,
> > one of those professors succeeded not only in borking
> > Bork but in borking himself as well (I refer to Larry
> > Tribe who, but for the backlash he would have received
> > for his role in taking out Bob Bork, would probably
> > have been a Clinton nominee to the Court).
> > The Court would have been a much more interesting
> > place the last few years if both Bob Bork and Larry
> > Tribe were sitting. But alas, we get Kennedy and
> > Breyer instead.
> > Paul can call President Bush "His Fraudulency" if he
> > wishes, but mainstream America will call him Mr.
> > President.
> > --Rick Duncan (I'm a happy guy today!!!!)
> > =====
> > nightfall--
> > daughters and kitten
> > purring.
> > (haiku, rfd, 12/00)
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
> > http://auctions.yahoo.com/
> Paul Finkelman
> Chapman Distinguished Professor
> University of Tulsa College of Law
> 3120 East Fourth Place
> Tulsa, OK 74104
> Fax 918-631-2194
> E-mail: paul-finkelman at utulsa.edu
More information about the Conlawprof