Supreme court case powell v alabama

On Tuesday the Supre Murphy; Ronald Mann has our preview. On Tuesday the Supreme Court also hears oral argument in Carpenter v.

Supreme court case powell v alabama

Bush asserted Supreme court case powell v alabama the net gain for Vice President Gore in Palm Beach County was votes, and directed the Circuit Court to resolve that dispute on remand.

The court further held that relief would require manual recounts in all Florida counties where so-called "undervotes" had not been subject to manual tabulation.

The court ordered all manual recounts to begin at once. Governor Bush and Richard Cheney, Republican candidates for President and Vice President, filed an emergency application for a stay of this mandate. On December 9, we granted the application, treated the application as a petition for a writ of certiorari, and granted certiorari.

The proceedings leading to the present controversy are discussed in some detail in our opinion in Bush v.

The Supreme Court Database

Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd. On November 8,the day following the Presidential election, the Florida Division of Elections reported that petitioner Bush had received 2, votes, and respondent Gore had received 2, votes, a margin of Mr.

Supreme court case powell v alabama

Butterworth, pro se, Paul F. Adams, and Roger J. Bernstein; and for Michael F. Because Governor Bush's margin of victory was less than "one-half of a percent A dispute arose concerning the deadline for local county canvassing boards to submit their returns to the Secretary of State Secretary.

The Secretary declined to waive the November 14 deadline imposed by statute.

U.S. Supreme Court

The Florida Supreme Court, however, set the deadline at November We granted certiorari and vacated the Florida Supreme Court's decision, finding considerable uncertainty as to the grounds on which it was based.

Bush I, ante, at On December 11, the Florida Supreme Court issued a decision on remand reinstating that date. On November 26, the Florida Elections Canvassing Commission certified the results of the election and declared Governor Bush the winner of Florida's 25 electoral votes. The Circuit Court denied relief, stating that Vice President Gore failed to meet his burden of proof.

Accepting jurisdiction, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. Harris, Per Curiam So. The court held that the Circuit Court had been correct to reject Vice President Gore's challenge to the results certified in Nassau County and his challenge to the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board's determination that 3, ballots cast in that county were not, in the statutory phrase, "legal votes.

Noting the closeness of the election, the court explained that "[o]n this record, there can be no question that there are legal votes within the 9, uncounted votes sufficient to place the results of this election in doubt.

The Supreme Court Database

A "legal vote," as determined by the Supreme Court, is "one in which there is a 'clear indication of the intent of the voter. The court therefore ordered a hand recount of the 9, ballots in Miami-Dade County.

The Supreme Court also determined that Palm Beach County and Miami-Dade County, in their earlier manual recounts, had identified a net gain of and legal votes, respectively, for Vice President Gore.

Rejecting the Circuit Court's conclusion that Palm Beach County lacked the authority to include the net votes sub- mitted past the November 26 deadline, the Supreme Court explained that the deadline was not intended to exclude votes identified after that date through ongoing manual recounts.

As to Miami-Dade County, the court concluded that although the votes identified were the result of a partial recount, they were "legal votes [that] could change the outcome of the election.

The Supreme Court therefore directed the Circuit Court to include those totals in the certified results, subject to resolution of the actual vote total from the Miami-Dade partial recount. The petition presents the following questions: With respect to the equal protection question, we find a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

II A The closeness of this election, and the multitude of legal challenges which have followed in its wake, have brought into sharp focus a common, if heretofore unnoticed, phenomenon.

In certifying election results, the votes eligible for inclusion in the certification are the votes meeting the properly established legal requirements. After the current counting, it is likely legislative bodies nationwide will examine ways to improve the mechanisms and machinery for voting.

B The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the electoral college.

This is the source for the statement in McPherson v. History has now favored the voter, and in each of the several States the citizens themselves vote for Presidential electors. When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter.

The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another.

It must be remembered that "the right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen's vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.

There is no difference between the two sides of the present controversy on these basic propositions. Respondents say that the very purpose of vindicating the right to vote justifies the recount procedures now at issue.A person may choose to have an abortion until a fetus becomes viable, based on the right to privacy contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Viability means the ability to live outside the womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception. The Supreme Court of the United States (sometimes colloquially referred to by the acronym SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United benjaminpohle.comished pursuant to Article III of the U.S.

Constitution in , it has original jurisdiction over a small range of cases, such as suits between two or more states, and those involving ambassadors. The case you are viewing is cited by the following Supreme Court decisions.

The case you are viewing is cited by the following Supreme Court decisions. Feb 13,  · The Supreme Court released orders from the November 16 conference on Monday morning; the justices did not add any new cases to their merits docket.. The calendar for the December sitting, which will begin on Monday, November 26, is available on the Supreme Court’s website.

Miller v. Alabama, U.S. (), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that mandatory sentences of life without the possibility of parole are unconstitutional for juvenile offenders. The ruling applied even to those persons who had committed murder as a juvenile, extending beyond the Graham benjaminpohle.coma () case, which had ruled juvenile life without parole.

Bush v. Gore :: U.S. 98 () :: Justia US Supreme Court Center