Footnotes (9)



'Bush v. Gore and the Distortion of Common Law Remedies,' from The Final Arbiter, Chapter 4

Tracy A. Thomas

University of Akron School of Law

The book The Final Arbiter addresses the legal and political consequences of the Bush v. Gore decision. This article presented as Chapter 4 addresses the lasting impact of Bush v. Gore on the law of remedies. While others have focused on what the Court should or could have done in the case, this article focuses on what the Court actually did by analyzing the text of the decision and the remedial platform that formed the Court's consensus. The Court in Bush adopted a new model of prophylactic relief that provided too much, not too little relief. Yet this prophylactic remedy was disconnected from prior legal principles guiding the judicial use of this unique remedial power. The result of this novel use of a prophylactic remedy is the creation of a future model of expansive relief for constitutional violations. However the case also provides a model of federal court use of a remedy to nullify state rights.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Keywords: prophylactic, remedy, Bush v. Gore, equal protection

JEL Classification: K19

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: July 22, 2002  

Suggested Citation

Thomas, Tracy A., 'Bush v. Gore and the Distortion of Common Law Remedies,' from The Final Arbiter, Chapter 4. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=316580 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.316580

Contact Information

Tracy A. Thomas (Contact Author)
University of Akron School of Law ( email )
150 University Ave.
Akron, OH 44325-2901
United States
330-972-6617 (Phone)
330-258-2343 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 999
Downloads: 63
Download Rank: 240,231
Footnotes:  9

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.281 seconds