Florida Justices Defend Turf, Citing State Law

Arguing that it was the “ultimate arbiter” of conflicting Florida law, the state Supreme Court here told the U.S. Supreme Court Monday that it did not overstep its authority last month when it extended a deadline for certifying presidential ballots.

Responding to a request for clarification by the U.S. high court, the state justices delivered a response that said their Nov. 21 certification decision resulted from a “narrow reading” of state laws that were “enacted long before the present election took place.”

By a 6-1 vote Monday, the state court said that the new deadline did not constitute creation of new law, but represented an interpretation of existing state law. The justices, who are often described as “judicial activists,” insisted that they did not overstep their legal bounds.

“Based on this court’s status as the ultimate arbiter of conflicting Florida law, we conclude that our construction . . . results in the formation of no new rules of state law,” the justices wrote.

The 41-page response came as the U.S. Supreme Court considered an appeal of a separate Florida high court decision. In that case, the U.S. court must decide whether the state court violated federal law when it voted last Friday to allow manual recounts of disputed presidential ballots in Florida. The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the recounts stopped on Saturday, pending the justices’ review.

The clarification Monday came out of an earlier foray into the disputed presidential race by the Florida Supreme Court.

Late last month, the state high court allowed hand recounting of votes for 12 days after the state’s normal vote-counting cutoff date of Nov. 14. That decision trimmed George W. Bush’s lead in Florida over Al Gore from 930 votes to 537.

Bush appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. After hearing arguments, the federal court then ruled 9-0 to seek a clarification of the state court’s reasoning.

In its reply, the state court said that it confronted conflicting state laws regarding when a recount is allowed and when the election must be certified.

The court ruled that vote-counting deadlines “must be construed in a flexible manner to accommodate” the complexities of manual recounts.

The court also reiterated its belief that, when Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, an outspoken Bush supporter, refused to accept updated vote tallies past the deadline, she was “prematurely rejecting” votes.

Chief Justice Charles T. Wells was the lone dissenter Monday. Craig Waters, a court spokesman, said that Wells objected to releasing the response while the U.S. Supreme Court was still considering the other appeal involving the court.

In Tallahassee, the Republican-controlled state Legislature has had a tempestuous relationship with the state Supreme Court; its seven justices were appointed by Democratic governors.

The court has declared several of the Legislature’s recent laws unconstitutional, including one that would have limited the amount of time the court has to weigh death penalty cases.

The court’s order Friday to restart the recounts--as Vice President Gore had demanded--infuriated many Republicans here. Shortly after, state Rep. Sandra L. Murman, a Tampa, Fla., Republican, said the GOP leadership in the Legislature was “shocked and dismayed.”

“I believe they’ve become very partisan,” she said of the state court.