The Hoffman - Bush connection

Te BTR Editorial Board should study their cases a little more closely and check their own political agendas at the door. One sentence explains it all: "Though the details differ, these two courtroom decisions yield the same real-world results. Both disenfranchise voters and consolidate authority in the hands of political power brokers."

The BTR is wrong on two points: first, the entire point of the law is the details of the cases, you know, the actual facts. The two cases, Bush v. Gore and Knutson v. Hoffman, involve entirely different legal questions and have nothing to do with one another. The BTR acknowledges as much by never once challenging the legal validity of the Court's ruling. Instead they choose to instead suggest that the Court should have ignored the written law and applied a "fair remedy" (fair to whom?) which would have perverted a remarkably clear (and fair) statute. It seems the BTR would prefer unaccountable "activist" judges who ignore what the law says and instead substitute their own opinions on what is fair in its place.

Secondly, the BTR is wrong to assert that the voters were "disenfranchised". One would think that a paper's editorial board would take more care in their choice of words. No voters were disenfranchised by the Court's decision because no one's vote was thrown out (as was the case in Bush v. Gore). Only nominating petitions were invalidated, not ballots. Should people still wish to vote for Mr. Hoffman they will still be able to by writing in his name. They will have their day in the voting booth so to speak. Mr. Hoffman's name simply will not appear next to two candidates who complied with the legal process for running for office.

The truth is this: the BTR is pissed that Hoffman is no longer on the ballot. Since there is no legal leg left for them to stand on they have resorted to complaining that those darn judges (doesn't everyone hate judges by now?) are paying too much attention to the law and aren't following their hearts enough. I say good for them, they're doing exactly what they're supposed to do.