US Courts deadlocked too?

US Courts deadlocked too?

There has been talk about the US Presidential elections being a tie or neither candidate winning a majority. In this eventuality, if the House of Representatives fails to elect the President by Inauguration Day, then the Senate-elecetd Vice-President would stand-in as President till the deadlock is resolved.

Now, in the eventuality of any litigation, then like it happened in 2000, the Supreme Court will decide who the next President will be. Eventually, the United States will have a President. Or so I thought. As it turns out, it is not so simple.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist who was scheduled to return to the Supreme Court from Cancer treatment this week, is still not back. Unfortunately, all evidence suggests that the Cancer was not completely removed.

So, if the 2004 elections end up in the Supreme Court and if Justice Rehnquist is unable to participate on the case, then the Supreme Court itself may be deadlocked 4-4. Should Justice Rehnquist step down, then Bush may appoint the next Chief Justice and that does not augur of any fairness in the final decision. Should this happen, we will have a democracy, where the President is self-appointed!

On second thoughts, that doesn't sound too bad. The US has "successfully" installed "democracies" in quite a few nations run by US-appointed leaders and is in the process of doing that across other places. If it is good for those nations, it must be good for the US too.