Legal Handicapping

Factual Questions
1

There concerns the likely effects of various political or personal matters on legal decisions in this election mess. Ostensibly they should have none, but with judges being human there exists the possibility at least that they will have some influence. My question, to those more familiar than myself with such matters, is if this is so, and what that influence would be.

  1. The US Supreme Court has accepted a review of the Florida SC ruling, surprising many observers who thought they would stay out. Does this have the effect of tempering future Florida SC rulings in this matter, as they know they are no longer the final word and can fear that a USSC reversal would lend credibility to the Republican charges about them? On the other hand, if the USSC upholds their ruling, does this embolden them any further?

  2. The Florida State Legislature seems to be moving full steam ahead with plans to select their own electors. This could set up another judicial/legislative confrontation, if the Florida SC rules this to be illegitimate (Congress may get involved at that point). Question: would the judiciary be “intimidated” by this, and shy away from issuing rulings which would set up such a confrontation? Or would they be more eager to assert their authority over the Legislature? Or no effect at all?

  3. Republicans have tried to get the Seminole County absentee ballot case shifted to another judge. This because the presiding judge was recently passed over by Jeb for an appellate position and they are afraid of payback. (According to CNN and other media reports.) Leaving aside the issue of the bias due to the promotion issue, what is the impact of the request for a new judge itself, which may be perceived as an implicit slur on the judge’s integrity. Does this make the judge even angrier, or more cautious about being accused of bias? Or is this a standard matter which would have no effect at all?

2

…Since the first ones attracted such an overwhelming response.

Are the lawyers and law firms that are representing the Bush and Gore camps affiliated in general with the Republican and Democratic parties (or conservative and liberal causes), or do the candidates pick a law firm based solely on legal acumen?

3

I think I heard that Barry Richard, lead attorney on the Bush team, is in fact a democrat. He said his clients don’t pick him based on his party registration, and that it isn’t relevent to how he does his job. Not the question you asked, but interesting nonetheless.

4

IIRC, Richard has represented Jeb in the past.

One more:

The opinion of almost every legal scholar and pundit I’ve seen is that the USSC is unlikely to rule in favor of Bush. How much does that fact in of itself influence the court? Are they reluctant to issue rulings that will be seen as bold and daring, or are they above that sort of thing?