Ghosts of Bush v. Gore loom before state high court

The ghosts of the 2000 election were on full display Wednesday morning before the state Supreme Court.

Coming just months before another highly contested presidential election, Florida's high court on Wednesday morning found itself returning to familiar territory: Does Florida have, and require, a uniform set of election laws for the entire state and each county.

(For those who may have forgotten, the state Supreme Court ordered a statewide recount of the 2000 presidential election between George Bush and Al Gore, only to have that recount shut down by the U.S. Supreme Court, which said that there was an "unequal evaluation of ballots"  by county.)

The case before the court on Wednesday: A Sarasota County charter change that required the use of paper ballots and the auditing of machines before election results are finalized. Voters in that county approved the change in 2006, months before the Florida Legislature mandated that counties switch to paper ballots in time for the 2008 election.

The state has argued that what did Sarasota County did was unconstitutional and interferes with the counting of ballots. An appeals court has sided with the state. But proponents say that local voters in a "home rule" county have a right to impose extra standards.

Several times during the oral arguments the justices referred to the 2000 electon that Bush won by 537 votes and the fact that lawmakers revamped the state's election laws in the wake of the chaotic contest that lasted for weeks.

Justice Charles Wells wondered aloud whether or not the Sarasota County charter change would lead to increased legal challenges to election results and the "thrusting" of the judicial branch into every election.

But Justice Harry Anstead pressed Pete Antonacci, the attorney representing Secretary of State Kurt Browning, on why no one wants Sarasota County to be able to check voting machines before the results are finalized. "There seems to be a policy of see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil,'' said Anstead.

And several justices questioned why the Legislature allowed counties to pick different types of voting machines if in fact lawmakers wanted to ensure uniformity across the state.