Post election litigation - more complications

In 2000, only Florida became an issue. This time, there could be contested results in multiple states.

One problem is that the various lawsuits filed in support of a particular candidate may have contradicting legal points with lawsuits filed in behalf of the same candidate in another state.

For example, arguments to prevent a recount in a state where a candidate is leading may undermine a lawsuit in a different state where the same candidate wants to force a recount. The variations in state laws may provide some cover for this issue, but if multiple state cases get to the Supreme Court, it's going to be hard to keep strategy straight.

It may also be difficult for a politicized Supreme Court to stay consistent with Bush v Gore, if Kerry comes in the same position Bush had in 2000.

His musings on a close election.


The Coming Post-Election Chaos:
A Storm Warning of Things to Come If the Vote Is as Close as Expected
By JOHN W. DEAN
----
Friday, Oct. 22, 2004

This next presidential election, on November 2, may be followed by post-election chaos unlike any we've ever known

Look at the swirling, ugly currents currently at work in this conspicuously close race. There is Republicans' history of going negative to win elections. There is Karl Rove's disposition to challenge close elections in post-election brawls. And there is Democrats' (and others) new unwillingness to roll over, as was done in 2000. Finally, look at the fact that a half-dozen lawsuits are in the works in the key states and more are being developed.

-- snip
The Nightmare Scenario: An Election Up in the Air For Months

It may be days or weeks, if not months, before we know the final results of this presidential election. And given the Republican control of the government, if Karl Rove is on the losing side, it could be years: He will take every issue (if he is losing) to its ultimate appeal in every state he can.

The cost of such litigation will be great - with the capital of citizens' trust in their government, and its election processes, sinking along with the nation's (if not the world's) financial markets, which loathe uncertainty. After Bush v. Gore, is there any doubt how the high Court would resolve another round? This time, though, the Court, too, will pay more dearly. With persuasive power as its only source of authority, the Court's power will diminish as the American people's cynicism skyrockets.

It does not seem to trouble either Rove or Bush that they are moving us toward a Twenty-first Century civil war -- and that, once again, Southern conservatism is at its core. Only a miracle, it strikes me, can prevent this election from descending into post-election chaos. But given the alternatives, a miracle is what I am hoping for.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20041022.html

But does not really address the legal dilemmas. I don't think that Rove can just jump on every possible lawsuit. They will need to be selective so that one lawsuit does not harm a stronger one. Keeping the challenges in line with rulings made in Bush v Gore would also be important.

But that may not work out. Winning may depend on a combination of both challenging recounts in some states and stopping recounts in others.