Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Bush v. Gore: The Worst (or at Least Second-to-the-Worst) Supreme Court Decision Ever

9 Pages Posted: 26 Mar 2011 Last revised: 8 May 2012

Mark S. Brodin

Boston College - Law School

Date Written: May 7, 2012

Abstract

In the stiff competition for worst Supreme Court decision ever, two candidates stand heads above the others for the simple reason that they precipitated actual fighting wars in their times. By holding that slaves, as mere chattels, could not sue in court and could never be American citizens, and further invalidating the Missouri Compromise, which had prohibited slavery in new territories, Dred Scott v. Sanford charted the course to secession and Civil War four years later. By disenfranchising Florida voters and thereby appointing popular-vote loser George W. Bush as President, Bush v. Gore set in motion events which would lead to two wars, neither of which is concluded over a decade later, as well as an unregulated greed-fest on Wall Street that continues to unhinge our economic well-being. As Professor Laurence Tribe, one of Vice President Gore’s lawyers, observed with understatement recently: “Some wrongfully decided Supreme Court decisions can be belatedly righted. Bush v. Gore cannot.”

Keywords: Dred Scott v. Sanford, Bush v. Gore, Elections, Electoral College, Disenfranchisement

Suggested Citation

Brodin, Mark S., Bush v. Gore: The Worst (or at Least Second-to-the-Worst) Supreme Court Decision Ever (May 7, 2012). Nevada Law Journal, Vol.12, No.3, 2012; Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 221. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1791808

Mark S. Brodin (Contact Author)

Boston College - Law School ( email )

885 Centre Street
Newton, MA 02459-1163
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
237
Rank
107,904
Abstract Views
1,807