The seven judges of the Florida Supreme Court are now deliberating on legal arguments which could decide the outcome of the US presidential election. Both sides had an hour to make their respective cases on whether or not manually recounted votes in three Florida counties could be included in the final tally; only a little over 900 votes separate the two. It is not known when the court's seven judges will make a decision, although officials have not ruled out the possibility that it could be as early as tomorrow.
The justices relentlessly peppered the lawyers with questions during the televised session that last just over two hours, with one hour allotted to either side. "The court is certainly aware of the historic nature of this session and is aware that this is a matter of utmost and vital importance to our nation, our state and our world," Chief Justice Charles Wells said in opening the hearing.
At the heart of the hearing was whether ballot-by-ballot recounts currently under way in three Florida counties should be included in the state's official results from the November 7 US presidential election.
Gore argues they should be, Bush disagrees, and each side points to pertinent sections of Florida law to support their arguments, with victory in the 2000 contest to succeed US President Bill Clinton hinging on the outcome. The Gore camp also wants the judges to set generous guidelines for establishing voter intent when tallying ballots, for example in cases where the mark corresponding to a candidate was indented but not properly punched through. Here again, Bush disagrees. The justices - five men and two women - bombarded the lawyers with questions on how to interpret relevant sections of Florida election law with regard to the recounts.
Gore's lawyers argued that the issue was of such high importance, and questions about the conduct of the vote so numerous, that painstaking review of each ballot in three counties was called for. Also engaged in the case were attorneys for Katherine Harris, the Florida secretary of state, who argued that, under state law, extensions in certifying votes are allowed only in cases of fraud, mechanical failure or bad weather.
Gore's attorneys appealed to the court to set out specific standards for counting votes by hand. "It is quite important that this court be as specific as possible" in defining standards for the manual recount process, said Gore lead lawyer David Boies. He was challenged by the justices on several occasions about concerns that hand recounts would continue for so long that Florida electors would be excluded from the Electoral College that meets on December 18.
A poll released today by CNN and USA Today indicates Americans support the hand recounts, but are bothered by the fact that a court decision could decide the election. Sixty percent of the 870 adults polled Sunday said the ongoing hand recounts should be included in the total votes from Florida, but 79 percent said they believe an accurate count is no longer possible.
One of the three counties where re-counts are underway or expected is Miami-Dade. Yesterday it began putting the 650,000 ballots through the counting machines again. It is supposed to separate out 11,000 papers, which the machine cannot read. These could then be examined by hand, to see if the voter's intentions are clear. The Republicans are taking a separate court case, to prevent this recount from going ahead. If the full recount does go ahead, Miami-Dade says there probably will not be a result until next month.
Both candidates are making occasional appearances in front of the cameras, each trying to look relaxed, presidential, and above bitter haggling over the vote counting process. But their spokespeople are not mincing their words. It could be a week before it makes a decision on this latest bone of contention.
Meanwhile, a Florida judge has rejected a petition seeking a new vote in Palm Beach County on behalf of voters who say the ballot for the November 7 presidential vote was confusing. Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Jorge Labarga ruled that a new vote being sought by the plaintiffs was not authorized by Florida law. The voters claimed that a confusing "butterfly" ballot may in Palm Beach County have skewed the results in the critical state, and that a large number of people mistakenly cast votes for Reform Party candidate, Pat Buchanan, even though they intended to vote for Democrat, Al Gore.
Henry Handler, a lawyer for the plaintiffs who were supported by the Democratic Party, said that the ruling would be appealed to a state appellate court. "Our intention is immediately to appeal this decision. We feel that the Florida state law gives the judge the discretion to ask for a new vote," Handler told a press conference. However Judge Labarga, in his ruling, said: "The relief sought by the plaintiffs is not permitted by law." Given the tightness of the election in Florida and ongoing recounts in the state, a new vote in Palm Beach County could have a decisive effect on the final outcome of the election. Acknowledging that he expected the plaintiffs to appeal, Judge Labarga said: "Let's not fool ourselves. I don't have the last word here."
