well, for god's sake --

[fox]

the appeals court? postponed the california recall. the recallers intend, obviously, to appeal to the supreme court; but i have to wonder if the court's going to hear the case. doesn't really seem like a federal matter, does it? what in the world does it have to do with the u.s. constitution? (no, i'm really asking.)

favorite part of this story: the poll on the right, where the question is "was the appeals court right to block the recall vote?" and the answers are "yes -- punch-card ballots must be eliminated"; "no -- unfair federal intrusion in state election"; and "i can't take six more months of this". :-D

Comments

[jgesteve.livejournal.com]

They're are using the Federal Voting Rights Act and saying that use of the punch card system could potentially disenfranchise a goodly sum of voters.

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

that's the position of the ACLU and the other folks in favor of postponing the recall. i'm saying, if i'm SCOTUS? this doesn't seem like a matter for me to deal with. i guess we'll see.

[jgesteve.livejournal.com]

Actually they have to since it was their judgement in Gore v. Bush that set the stage for the ACLU's and 9th Circuit's positions.

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

it was bush v. gore, and so what? people use supreme court decisions in their arguments before the supreme court all the time. doesn't mean they have to reconsider the question. as i understand it, they can deny the recallers' petition for cert on the basis of having decided the issue already.