Michael Ufferman
Staff Attorney to Justice Major Harding
And at the end of the day – despite all of the potential pressure and literally the nation – and the world – watching the court, Justice Harding was adamant (as he was in every case) that this case would be decided based on the legal arguments presented, case precedent, and stare decisis, and no consideration would be given to any political or ideological view.
And that is how he decided the Bush v. Gore cases.
Staff attorneys for Justice Major Harding working late on November 19, 2000. L-R: Michael Ufferman, Susan O'Halloran, and Jeff Schumm.
I am often asked by clients whether the appellate process can be fair, and whether a particular appellate judge – based on his or her background – will properly consider the legal arguments being presented on appeal rather than just ruling consistent with some perceived political/ideological position that the judge supposedly holds. I always give the same answer. I worked at the Florida Supreme Court when the court was deciding arguably one of the most “political” decisions in our nation’s history – a decision that would have a direct impact on who would be the next president of our country.
During that time, I looked out my office window and saw row after row of trucks and vans from various news organizations. There was even a clown on stilts juggling outside my window one day. Our office suite received numerous calls and letters from various people inquiring about how Justice Harding was going to rule – and, of course, all of those calls were politely and appropriately answered and redirected (with an explanation that it is not proper for a judge to be involved in any such communications).
And at the end of the day – despite all of the potential pressure and literally the nation – and the world – watching the court, Justice Harding was adamant (as he was in every case) that this case would be decided based on the legal arguments presented, case precedent, and stare decisis, and no consideration would be given to any political or ideological view. And that is how he decided the Bush v. Gore cases.
And being a first-hand witness to the way that the appellate process worked at the Florida Supreme Court in November of 2000 still gives me faith to this day that – regardless of my client’s background, what he is accused of, or any collateral issues surrounding the case – the appellate court will fairly consider my client’s case on appeal.
Election 2000 Memory Project