Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000 - Tapa blanda

"Dershowitz's book is an all-out call to revolution against the high court....The first half of the book features a cogent and much-welcome summary of the claims advanced as the case called Bush vs. Gore worked its way up from the Florida courts. Making legal sense of the constitutional sausage wrought by butterfly ballots, Vote-O-Matic machines and two conflicting provisions of Florida's election laws, Dershowitz places in context the intellectual outrage that was the high court's decision to stay the recount ordered the day before by the Florida Supreme Court."--The Washington Post Book World "The Harvard law professor examines the Supreme Court's involvement in the 2000 presidential election and concludes that the court's decision reflected its desire for a particular partisan outcome and disregarded its principles. The result: The court might have sent to the White House a candidate who actually lost the election."--Ron Berthel, The Associated Press "This well-reasoned and controversial book asks central questions about American democracy and the role of citizens and courts in our society." --Library Journal This legal expert and best-selling author weighs in with his two-cents' worth on the subject of the 2000 presidential election. In unequivocal terms certain to generate discussion and debate, he finds the Supreme Court's involvement in the case to be a blatant example of partisan politics."--Booklist "Dershowitz's book is an all-out call to revolution against the high court....The first half of the book features a cogent and much-welcome summary of the claims advanced as the case called Bush vs. Gore worked its way up from the Florida courts. Making legal sense of the constitutional sausage wrought by butterfly ballots, Vote-O-Matic machines and two conflicting provisions of Florida's election laws, Dershowitz places in context the intellectual outrage that was the high court's decision to stay the recount ordered the day before by the Florida Supreme Court."--The Washington Post Book World "The Harvard law professor examines the Supreme Court's involvement in the 2000 presidential election and concludes that the court's decision reflected its desire for a particular partisan outcome and disregarded its principles. The result: The court might have sent to the White House a candidate who actually lost the election."--Ron Berthel, The Associated Press "This well-reasoned and controversial book asks central questions about American democracy and the role of citizens and courts in our society." --Library Journal This legal expert and best-selling author weighs in with his two-cents' worth on the subject of the 2000 presidential election. In unequivocal terms certain to generate discussion and debate, he finds the Supreme Court's involvement in the case to be a blatant example of partisan politics."--Booklist "Dershowitz's book is an all-out call to revolution against the high court....The first half of the book features a cogent and much-welcome summary of the claims advanced as the case called Bush vs. Gore worked its way up from the Florida courts. Making legal sense of the constitutional sausage wrought by butterfly ballots, Vote-O-Matic machines and two conflicting provisions of Florida's election laws, Dershowitz places in context the intellectual outrage that was the high court's decision to stay the recount ordered the day before by the Florida Supreme Court."--The Washington Post Book World "The Harvard law professor examines the Supreme Court's involvement in the 2000 presidential election and concludes that the court's decision reflected its desire for a particular partisan outcome and disregarded its principles. The result: The court might have sent to the White House a candidate who actually lost the election."--Ron Berthel, The Associated Press "This well-reasoned and controversial book asks central questions about American democracy and the role of citizens and courts in our society." --Library Journal This legal expert and best-selling author weighs in with his two-cents' worth on the subject of the 2000 presidential election. In unequivocal terms certain to generate discussion and debate, he finds the Supreme Court's involvement in the case to be a blatant example of partisan politics."--Booklist "Dershowitz's book is an all-out call to revolution against the high court....The first half of the book features a cogent and much-welcome summary of the claims advanced as the case called Bush vs. Gore worked its way up from the Florida courts. Making legal sense of the constitutional sausage wrought by butterfly ballots, Vote-O-Matic machines and two conflicting provisions of Florida's election laws, Dershowitz places in context the intellectual outrage that was the high court's decision to stay the recount ordered the day before by the Florida Supreme Court."--The Washington Post Book World "The Harvard law professor examines the Supreme Court's involvement in the 2000 presidential election and concludes that the court's decision reflected its desire for a particular partisan outcome and disregarded its principles. The result: The court might have sent to the White House a candidate who actually lost the election."--Ron Berthel, The Associated Press "This well-reasoned and controversial book asks central questions about American democracy and the role of citizens and courts in our society." --Library Journal This legal expert and best-selling author weighs in with his two-cents' worth on the subject of the 2000 presidential election. In unequivocal terms certain to generate discussion and debate, he finds the Supreme Court's involvement in the case to be a blatant example of partisan politics."--Booklist

Many on both sides of the political fence were mystified by, and in some cases, furious at, the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore. While legal columnists lined up to decry the court's decision in the days following its ruling, nobody has explained the decision in the context of the court's history of dealing with politically-charged cases, and nobody has looked in detail at how the individual justice's previous writings were or were not reflected in the ruling. In 'Supreme Injustice', Alan Dershowitz will approach the ruling systematically from historical, political , and legal grounds. His ultimate conclusion will be that the Supreme Court did more damage to itself than is apparent now, creating a disturbing precedent that will come back to haunt it, and sullying its and the American judicial system's reputation for fairness at home and abroad. He will also speculate as to why the Court ruled as it did and explore the myriad consequences of the decision. Alan Dershowitz is famous for explaining complicated legal concepts in a serious but accessible style, both in his Harvard Law School criminal law class and in his numerous books. 'Supreme Injustice', written in this characteristic style, will be published, in all likelihood, in a period where the 'spirit of bipartisanship' currently celebrated by politicians and the media will almost assuredly have begun to wear off, and in which we may have established with some certainty that Al Gore won Florida. It's likely that this combination of events will leave many who disagreed with the ruling looking for a thoughtful explanation of how and why it happened, and it's our belief that they will turn to this book.