« So sue me. | Main | Insult to injury »

Back to the races

As I suspected would happen, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to get involved in the New Jersey Senate race ballot dispute, as did a federal district court. The Republicans had a couple of reasonable arguments, but I think the Democrats had the stronger position on this one point, from their Supreme Court brief:

The Applicant has failed to meet his burden of proving irreparable harm in every way. He alleges no harm of his own, and he shows no real potential of harm to others except Senator Lautenberg and the Democrats of New Jersey. Given that there is currently no voter from the State of New Jersey whose ballot condition will not or cannot be fixed over the next month, there is no need for this Court to intervene.
While Doug Forrester's election chances were seriously harmed by this decision, that's not the kind of harm the court is going to rectify. That doesn't mean I agree with the Democratic position, though. The real harm was not to Forrester, but to the rule of law. It sounds reasonable to say that statutes should be interpreted "liberally" in order to preserve voter choice. Why let some minor technical administrative details get in the way of a full electoral process? Why? Because that's the law. It's true that rules can sometimes operate in ways that seem rigid. But there's an advantage to "rigid" rules that doesn't apply when one construes the rules "liberally." There's no possibility of bias. Exceptions aren't made by formula; human beings have to decide to grant exceptions. And those people aren't deciding in a vacuum; they know the effects of their decisions when they make them.

When the legislature wrote the law in question, they didn't know whether a Democrat or Republican would benefit. They didn't know whether the Senate would be closely divided. Their choice of a deadline, while arbitrary, was unbiased. When the New Jersey Supreme Court rewrote the law in question, they knew they were benefiting the Democratic Party. There's just too much temptation for abuse. There's the appearance of impropriety, even if the judges are trying to be fair. All we have to do is look at Bush v. Gore to see this problem. Republicans were convinced the Florida Supreme Court was biased. Democrats were convinced that the U.S. Supreme Court was biased. And it was all because people were ignoring the law in favor of ad hoc decisionmaking.

Aside from that, when exceptions are made, its inevitable that they'll be made to benefit the powerful, not the weak. Does anybody believe that the court would have extended the deadline for the Socialist Party, or the Libertarian Party, or the Greens? (In this case, the New Jersey Supreme Court even admitted it: this decision was made in part as part of a policy "to preserve the two party system.")

Pre-established rules, no matter how arbitrary, treat everyone equally. Exceptions don't. Exceptions can't.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.oobleck.com/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/410

Comments (2)

judy:

Funny that the democrats should mention "exceptions"...remember when that democrat for congress DIED and was still on the ballet and WON??

Democrats said that to challenge the DEAD GUY would be "mean" to his widow.

I guess it's hard for democrats to keep track of all the Mayor Daily (the first) lies that it keeps spinning...but, please!

Democrats may be synonomous with sexretaries, bongs, and peaceniks--but upholding the law has never been a democrats strong suit.

Partha Mazumdar:

Democrats may be synonomous with sexretaries, bongs, and peaceniks--but upholding the law has never been a democrats strong suit.

I always thought that being a Democrat meant being part of the party that advocated for Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s, advocated for the ERA in the 1970s, has always been pro-labor, pro gay rights, and pro-abortion rights; I thought it was the party that started Social Security; I thought the President who led the country against Hitler and Japan was a Democrat; the President who led us through the greatest period of economic growth was a Democrat. It's a party synonomous with many things -- things to be quite proud of.

And Gore went to Vietnam, Carter went to the Naval Academy and was a submarine engineer, McGovern was a WWII bomber pilot in the US Army Air Force flying 35 missions, Johnson was in the Navy (where he won a Silver Star), Kennedy was in the Navy and a war hero.

"Democrats may be synonomous with sexretaries, bongs, and peaceniks." I have no idea what you are talking about.

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on October 8, 2002 3:47 AM.

The previous post in this blog was So sue me..

The next post in this blog is Insult to injury.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Powered by
Movable Type 3.31