II. The Legal Controversy in Florida.

Whereas the results of the election of 2000 were unusually close, and the outcome of the tabulation of electoral votes came to depend solely upon the determination of the rightful winner of the state of Florida's 25 electoral votes;

Whereas the legislature of the state of Florida prescribed that the electors thereof be awarded to the presidential candidate receiving the highest number of votes on November 7, 2000 pursuant to Section 103.011 of Florida Statutes (2000), which states:
 

Electors of President and Vice-President, known as presidential electors, shall be elected on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each year the number of which is a multiple of 4. Votes cast for the actual candidates for President and Vice-President shall be counted as votes cast for the presidential electors supporting such candidates. The Department of State shall certify as elected the presidential electors of the candidates for President and Vice-President who receive the highest number of votes.

Whereas, following Election Day, certain interpretations of the initial machine tabulations of votes in Florida suggested a possible narrow victory for the Republican Party candidates for President and Vice President over the Democratic Party candidates for President and Vice President;

Whereas, a complex legal controversy arose between these candidates concerning the procedures, standards, and time frames established by applicable law pertaining to the recounting of ballots in that state—a controversy that eventually resulted in a hearing before the Florida Supreme Court on December 6, 2000 and in a ruling by that body on December 8, 2000, which dispute implicated, in the words of the Florida Supreme Court justices' ensuing opinion, "the essence of the structure of our democratic society" and "the will of the people of Florida as the guiding principle for the selection of . . . presidential electors"; viz.:
 

We are dealing with the essence of the structure of our democratic society; with the interrelationship within that framework, between the United States Constitution and the statutory scheme established pursuant to that authority by the Florida Legislature. Pursuant to that authority extended by the United States Constitution, in section 103.011, Florida Statutes (2000), the Legislature has expressly vested in the citizens of the state of Florida the right to select the electors for President and Vice President of the United States:

[Section 103.011 of Florida Statutes (2000) text cited above].

In so doing, the Legislature has placed the election of presidential electors squarely in the hands of Florida's voters under the general election laws of Florida. Hence, the Legislature has expressly recognized the will of the people of Florida as the guiding principle for the selection of all elected officials in the state of Florida, whether they be county commissioners or presidential electors.

[Per Curiam, Florida Supreme Court Case No. SC00-2431 (pp. 17–18) Albert Gore, Jr. and Joseph L. Lieberman, Appellants vs. Katherine Harris as Secretary etc., et al., Appellees, (December 8, 2000) Corrected Opinion.]

Whereas, after duly considering extensive briefs and holding a hearing and oral argument on December 6, 2000, the Supreme Court of Florida on December 8, 2000 issued a reasonable ruling applying Florida statutes and effecting the Florida Legislature's intent, ordering the Florida Secretary of State to include certain (previously excluded) manually recounted vote totals from certain Florida counties in the official tabulation; said ruling further mandated that a manual recount be conducted forthwith, under judicial supervision, of all machine-counted ballots in Florida that did not record a vote for any candidate for President (known as "undervotes") and further directed state judges to serve as adjudicators of all disputed undervote ballots under the superintendence of a single trial court judge in Leon County. Per Curiam, Florida Supreme Court Case No. SC00-2431 (pp. 39–40);

Whereas, on December 9, 2000, said manual recount of Florida's statewide undervotes had commenced in an orderly manner under judicial supervision in Leon County, Florida and in other counties throughout the state, the object of which was to ascertain which slate of presidential electors had been chosen by the voters of Florida;

Whereas said duly authorized state process mandated by the U.S. Constitution was underway to implement the intent of the legislature of Florida to determine the rightful recipient of that state's electoral votes according to the will of the people of Florida;

Whereas by December 9, 2000 it was reasonably certain that the results of said statewide manual recount of undervotes in Florida, if completed by December 12, 2000, would likely decide the outcome of the 2000 presidential election and thus determine the head of the executive branch of the federal government for the next four years;
 

Next page: III. The U.S. Supreme Court's Intervention
 

The Counts of Censure
I. Applicable Laws and Principles
II. The Legal Controversy in Florida
IV. The U.S. Supreme Court's Decision
V. The Anomalous Nature of the Per Curiam Rulings
VI. The Tragic Impact of the Supreme Court's Rulings
VII. The Voice of Memory
Therefore it is resolved that . . .