Remembering Bush v. Gore
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court made clear its willingness to intervene in the 2024 election, with a majority of the justices allowing a purge of Virginia voters asserted by the state to be non-citizens — despite the fact that many are citizens who have been misidentified by the state. The National Voter Registration Act explicitly bans this kind of purge in the 90 days before an election, but a right-wing majority nonetheless allowed it to pass. In light of this decision and the possibility of future interventions in what is likely to be a close election, we must learn some lessons from a direct historical parallel: Bush v. Gore.
We cannot forget the fundamental wrongheadedness of the Court’s ruling in Bush v. Gore, which was possible only with the votes of at least two justices whose conflicts of interest merited recusal, one of whom reportedly “provided the early framework” for the decision before oral arguments were even presented to the Court. The conflict-tainted Bush v. Gore ruling was one of the most consequential decisions in modern U.S. history, and indeed, at least two justices on today’s Court have little ability to appear impartial in any election litigation. If we are bound to traverse this all-too-familiar path, there are a few things we must keep in mind.
Conflicts of interest tainted the decision in Bush v. Gore.
Bush v. Gore was wrong on the merits.
The consequences of Bush v. Gore were damaging to the U.S.
