There could be two or three hundred times in its long history, but certainly it is a relatively rare occurrence for it to reverse or overturn a prior ruling. But it is not possible to undo the damage done by a plainly bad decision. In our time, Bush v. Gore and Citizens United would qualify as plainly bad decisions. If another Bush v. Gore arises, and it surely will, the opposite decision is rational, i.e., let the counting continue until the result is known, assuming the result is critical to the outcome. Or if the the election is hopelessly flawed, then order that the election flaw be remedied and the election process repeated. The correct result should be paramount. The Constitution provides for the case of an election having occurred but no qualified candidate having emerged victorious.. Citizens should be reversed. I am certain that attempts will be made to get the Court to take it up again, but on what grounds? There are several good possibilities at least.
Last edited:
