Q. Who won yesterday's showdown before the US Supreme Court?
A.
Nobody yet. Guessing the Supreme Court's leanings from the questions asked during oral arguments is always a risky business - and never more so than on a matter of import like this.
Q. Did the Supreme Court session offer some hints of what some justices were thinking?
A.
Several justices seemed to show sympathy for George W. Bush's argument that the Florida Supreme Court exceeded its authority when it allowed recounts to continue, at Al Gore's request, past the Nov. 14 deadline cited in Florida state law.
''The date changed,'' said Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. ''It just does look like a very dramatic change made by the Florida court.''
But other justices voiced doubts about whether this was a matter for the federal courts to rule on at all. ''We owe the highest respect to the state court when it says what the state law is,'' said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Q.
Was there any hopeful news for Al Gore?
A.
Yes. The justices focused on a narrow range of issues that don't necessarily apply to his current legal challenge of the Florida results. Nor does the court appear poised to issue a broad, sweeping ruling that would squelch litigation and settle the election once and for all.
Q.
How could the court rule against Gore, and not affect his current legal case?
A.
The case before the Supreme Court deals only with the recounts that took place before the election was certified by Florida officials Nov. 26. If the court issues a narrow ruling on behalf of Bush, it could cost Gore a few hundred votes he gained in that period but would not necessarily stop a Florida judge from ordering the further recounts that Gore has requested of thousands of disputed ballots from Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.
Q.
What is the status of that case?
A.
A trial in Leon County Circuit Court in Tallahassee is scheduled to begin today. Yesterday, the Gore legal team lost a bid to begin recounting the Miami-Dade and Palm Beach county votes before that trial is finished.
Q.
What happens now?
A. Following their usual procedure, the justices met yesterday afternoon in a conference to vote. The chief justice will assign the opinion to a judge with the majority. A minority may join in a dissent.
Q.
Will the court rule even if it is sharply divided?
A.
It could, but on matters like this - where the public's faith in political institutions is at stake - the justices labor to reach unanimity. It's possible that a divided court could dismiss the case without comment, rather than issue a split verdict.
Q. When will the court announce its ruling?
A.
The court usually takes months to announce a ruling, but in matters of national importance it can act in hours or days.
