Highly Unjust (How the Supreme Court of the United States Held Up the 2000 Election)

Author: (American) Alan Dershowitz, translated by Liao Ming and others
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2003-10-01
Features: Who really lost the 2000 election? "Although we cannot be absolutely certain about the identity of the winner of the 2000 presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. That is the nation's trust in judges as impartial guardians of the rule of law." — Justice John Paul Stevens, in his dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore, ended the 2000 election by stopping the manual recount in Florida. The five justices who did so damaged the credibility of the U.S. Supreme Court, and their illegal ruling in Bush v. Goreed a more lasting impact on Americans than the election result itself. In Unjust, Alan Dershowitz—one of America's most distinguished legal experts—explains why the Bush v. Gore case will become a lasting legacy of the most contested election. Dershowitz skillfully explains: · Why the U.S. Supreme Court's decision was unprincipled · How the U.S. Supreme Court betrayed the trust of both Democrats and Republicans · How the U.S. Supreme Court failed the "slippery slope" test · Why the moral authority of the U.S. Supreme Court is important and how it was damaged · The lessons of Bush v. Gore for all of us In 2004, voters had a chance to reassess the outcome of the 2000 election, but these five justices hold lifetime appointments and are accountable to no one. Dershowitz sharply criticizes their actions, hoping the American people will ensure that future justices do not repeat such injustice. The U.S. Supreme Court ended the 2000 presidential election with its controversial ruling in Bush v. Gore, leaving countless Americans confused and furious. The U.S. Supreme Court holds a unique position in the system of separation of powers and checks and balances and is considered the embodiment of fairness and principle. Because it is believed to be above political conflict, how could it make a biased ruling, and how could it deliver a candidate to the White House who was, at the time, known to have actually lost the election? In Unjust, best-selling author and legal expert Alan M. Dershowitz directly addresses these questions, ultimately leaving those still angered by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling no longer mystified by the Bush v. Gore case. Dershowitz, who once served as a law clerk to a U.S. Supreme Court justice, argues that in this case, the majority of the justices prioritized a specific biased outcome over legal principles. Like in his other best-selling books, Dershowitz clarifies complex legal issues and explains concepts such as "equal protection" and "irreparable harm." After thoroughly researching the justices' previous writings and rulings, Dershowitz proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the justices who put George W. Bush in the presidency abandoned their earlier positions to achieve this goal. As one of the most biased rulings in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court, Bush v. Gore damaged the court's image as an impartial arbiter of important national issues. Dershowitz believes that this resulted in the loss of the American people's respect, severely threatening the court's position in national affairs. However, Dershowitz sees that this constitutional crisis could produce something beneficial—if we learn the lessons of Bush v. Gore and take timely measures to prevent such an event from happening again.