Abstract

 


 



The Presidential Election Dispute, the Political Question Doctrine, and the Fourteenth Amendment: A Reply to Professors Krent and Shane


Robert J. Pushaw


Pepperdine University - School of Law

2001

Florida State University Law Review, Vol. 29, 2001

Abstract:     
In this analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bush v. Gore, Professor Pushaw compares that opinion to the Court’s precedent established in Baker v. Carr. Baker set the stage for Bush, and while Professor Pushaw believes that both cases were wrongly decided, he argues that the Bush decision is more defensible because it departed less radically from the Court’s existing practice. Baker turned the political question doctrine into a prudential case-by-case judgment call. Ever since, the Court has almost always exercised this unbridled discretion in favor of intervening in heavily politicized disputes. Moreover, Baker provides a “precedent” for the Court’s Equal Protection Clause analysis in Bush.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 22

Keywords: Bush v. Gore, Baker v. Carr, Equal Protection Clause

JEL Classification: K19, K39

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: October 19, 2009  

Suggested Citation

Pushaw, Robert J., The Presidential Election Dispute, the Political Question Doctrine, and the Fourteenth Amendment: A Reply to Professors Krent and Shane (2001). Florida State University Law Review, Vol. 29, 2001. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1491304

Contact Information

Robert J. Pushaw (Contact Author)
Pepperdine University - School of Law ( email )
24255 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90263
United States
(310) 506-6318 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 188
Downloads: 25

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.312 seconds