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

22 Pages Posted: 19 Oct 2009

See all articles by Robert J. Pushaw

Robert J. Pushaw

Pepperdine University - Rick J. Caruso School of Law

Date Written: 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.

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

JEL Classification: K19, K39

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: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1491304

Robert J. Pushaw (Contact Author)

Pepperdine University - Rick J. Caruso School of Law ( email )

24255 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90263
United States
(310) 506-6318 (Phone)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
52
Abstract Views
906
rank
540,923
PlumX Metrics