The recent US election seems to be a topic of concern to many teens. It is confusing at best and disappointing at worst, to see adults act so crazy - especially when those adults are the candidates for leader of the strongest nation in the free world. Many of you have written me asking what it all means for America, how things could have become so messed up, and what this election is saying to the rest of the world about the USA. Although the politics of the United States isn't what one generally thinks of as "Teen Advice", many of you have been coming to me with questions that I just can't ignore. So, in this special feature written by attorney Mark Levine, you will get a detailed explanation of what happened in Florida from the democratic perspective. Hope it helps!

The Q & A

Q:  I'm not a lawyer and I don't understand the recent US Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore. Can you explain it to me?

A:  Sure. I'm a lawyer. I read it. It says Bush wins, even if Gore got the most votes.

Q:  But wait a second. The US Supreme Court has to give a reason, right?

A:  Right.

Q:  So Bush wins because hand-counts are illegal?

A:  Oh no. Six of the justices (two-thirds majority) believed the hand-counts were legal and should be done.

Q: Oh. So the justices did not believe that the hand-counts would find any legal ballots?

A:  Nope. The five conservative justices clearly held (and all nine justices agreed) "that punch card balloting machines can produce an unfortunate number of ballots which are not punched in a clean, complete way by the voter."  So there are legal votes that should be counted but can't be.

Q: Oh. Does this have something to do with states' rights? Don't conservatives love that?

A:  Yes. These five justices have held that the federal government has no business telling a sovereign state university it can't steal trade secrets just because such stealing is prohibited by law.  Nor does the federal government have any business telling a state that it should bar guns in schools. Nor can the federal government use the equal protection clause to force states to take measures to stop violence against women.

Q: Is there an exception in this case?

A:  Yes, the "Gore Exception." States have no rights to control their own state elections when it can result in Gore being elected President. This decision is limited to only this situation.

Q: C'mon. The Supremes didn't really say that. You're exaggerating!

A:  Nope.  They held, "Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, as the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities."

Q: What complexities?

 A:  They didn't say.

Q:  I'll bet I know the reason. I heard Jim Baker say this. The votes can't be counted because the Florida Supreme Court, "changed the rules of the election after it was held." Right?

A:  Wrong. The US Supreme Court made clear that the Florida Supreme Court did not change the rules of the election.  But the US Supreme Court found the failure of the Florida Court to change the rules was wrong.

Next page > Part 2 > Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6