Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has indicated second thoughts about her vote in the infamous Bush V Gore case of December 2000, when the Court decided to intervene in the 2000 Presidential Election controversy between Al Gore and George W. Bush in Florida.
The Supreme Court decided that the vote recount ordered by the Florida State Supreme Court should be halted, giving the victory to Bush, and leading to his election by the miniscule margin of 537 votes, and making him the Electoral College winner by 271-266.
Now, O’Connor has expressed regret that the Court did something it had no precedent to do, decide the election results in a closely competitive contest by far less than one percent of the vote. Where does it state in the Constitution that the Supreme Court should so intervene? The state Supreme Court should have been the final determinant, and possibly, Bush would have won anyway, but at least the Supreme Court would not have done what was a revolutionary precedent!
It could be that O’Connor feels guilt because she is well aware of the disasters that occurred under George W. Bush, and the beginning of the attempt to change his historical image, through the opening of his Presidential Library this week in Dallas, Texas.
We will never know whether Al Gore would have been a better President, but it is hard to believe that he would have been worse than Bush turned out to be!