Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Supreme InjusticeHow the High Court Hijacked Election 2000$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Alan M. Dershowitz

Print publication date: 2003

Print ISBN-13: 9780195158076

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2003

DOI: 10.1093/0195158075.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 23 January 2021

Would the Majority Have Stopped the Hand Count if Gore Had Been Ahead?

Would the Majority Have Stopped the Hand Count if Gore Had Been Ahead?

3: Would the Majority Have Stopped the Hand Count if Gore Had Been Ahead?
Supreme Injustice

Alan M. Dershowitz (Contributor Webpage)

Oxford University Press

Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US constitutional system in ways that it had never been tested before, and did so not because of incompetence, but because of malice aforethought. The author states that he is convinced that if it had been Bush rather than Gore who needed the Florida recount in order to have any chance of winning the election, that at least some of the five justices who voted to stop the recount would instead have voted to allow it to proceed. The main sections of the chapter are: Judicial Impropriety; Hypothetical Cases Involving a Supreme Court Decision Regarding a Presidential Election; The Difficulty of Proving an Improper Motive; Academic Defenders of the Majority Justices; Ad Hominem Arguments and Analysis of Motive; and Analysing the Justices’ Motives in Bush vs Gore: A Prelude.

Keywords:   academic defence, Ad Hominem Arguments, analysis of motives, George W. Bush, Bush vs Gore, election recount, Florida, Florida recount, Al Gore, Hypothetical Cases, improper motives, Judicial Impropriety, motives, US constitution, US justices’ motives, US presidential election 2000, US Supreme Court, USA

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .