82 B.U. L. Rev. 609 (2002)
When Courts Decide Elections: The Constitutionality of Bush v. Gore

handle is hein.journals/bulr82 and id is 621 raw text is: SYMPOSIUM
FEDERAL COURTS AND
ELECTORAL POLITICS
WHEN COURTS DECIDE ELECTIONS:
THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF BUSH v. GORE*
LOUISE WEINBERG**
INTRODUCTION: OF HARD BALL AND BASEBALL .......................................... 610
I. THE IRRELEVANCE OF BOTH BAKER V. CARR AND THE
PASSIVE  V IRTUES. ............................................................................ 621
11.  ELECTING  WITHOUT AN  ELECTION ....................................................... 627
Ill. THE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS OF JUDICIAL POWER TO
D ECIDE  ELECTIONS  .............................................................................. 635
IV. CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED REMEDIES .......................................... 640
V. THE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS OF SUPREME COURT POWER TO
DECIDE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS ...................................................... 657
V I.  T HE  STA KES  ......................................................................................... 661
C ONCLUSION  ................................................................................................... 664
The election [of the President] must be made either by some existing
authority... or by the people themselves.-The two Existing authorities under
the National Constitution would be the Legislative & Judiciary. The latter [I
presume is] out of the question.
-James Madison1
* This paper was presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law
Schools, Section on Federal Courts, Jan. 2002. A talk based on an earlier draft was
presented at a faculty colloquium at the University of Texas School of Law, Oct. 2001. I
should acknowledge valuable help from Stuart Benjamin, Mitch Berman, Steve Bickerstaff,
Mark Gergen, Cal Johnson, Doug Laycock, Sandy Levinson, Jordan Steiker, Larry Yackle,
and Ernie Young, and my editors, Howard Lipton and Chris Mooradian.
** Holder of the Bates Chair and Professor of Law, The University of Texas.
1 JAMES MADISON, NOTES OF DEBATES IN THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787 (1966)

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?