I just reviewed the brief (13 page) decision by the 11 members of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. They unanimously overturned the previous ruling by three of the most liberal members of the Ninth Circuit. Technically, the earlier Ninth Circuit decision was withdrawn as soon as the larger, 11-member group, agreed to hear the case. In practice, this amounted to overruling their most liberal colleagues.

Thus, in their brief, the Ninth Court reviewed the original August 20, 2003 decision by the California district court that affirmed the election was required to be held to comply with Californian law. The Ninth Court affirmed the reasoning of the district court on the basis of two points.

1) The amount of hardship the State of California and its population would suffer if the recall election were delayed. The Ninth Court concluded significant harm would be done and hundreds of thousands of votes would be disenfranchised (absentee voters who have already cast their ballots).

2) In one small line, the Ninth Court stated “we are reluctant to intercede… …falls within the province of the state to determine.”

I would be happier if they had stressed point number two – that is, the Federal Courts do not have any jurisdiction over local elections unless they have evidence of fraud. However, given the liberal bias of the most overruled court in the land, I am just thankful the Ninth Court managed to do the right thing at all.

The plaintiff, the ACLU, still has the option of appealing this decision to the Supreme Court. But while the ACLU may seem anti-American in their actions, they are not stupid. If they can’t win in the liberal Ninth Circuit Court, they have no chance at the Supreme Court. I think they’ll let the matter drop.