531US1
Unit: $$U9
[05-01-02 10:02:37] PAGES PGT: OPIN
Cite as: 531 U. S. 98 (2000)
105
Per Curiam
of another. See, e. g., Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections,
383 U. S. 663, 665 (1966) (“[O]nce the franchise is granted to
the electorate, lines may not be drawn which are inconsistent
with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment”). It must be remembered that “the right of suffrage
can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a
citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the
free exercise of the franchise.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S.
533, 555 (1964).
There is no difference between the two sides of the present
controversy on these basic propositions. Respondents say
that the very purpose of vindicating the right to vote justifies the recount procedures now at issue. The question before us, however, is whether the recount procedures the
Florida Supreme Court has adopted are consistent with its
obligation to avoid arbitrary and disparate treatment of the
members of its electorate.
Much of the controversy seems to revolve around ballot
cards designed to be perforated by a stylus but which, either
through error or deliberate omission, have not been perforated with sufficient precision for a machine to register the
perforations. In some cases a piece of the card—a chad—is
hanging, say, by two corners. In other cases there is no
separation at all, just an indentation.
The Florida Supreme Court has ordered that the intent
of the voter be discerned from such ballots. For purposes
of resolving the equal protection challenge, it is not necessary to decide whether the Florida Supreme Court had the
authority under the legislative scheme for resolving election disputes to define what a legal vote is and to mandate a
manual recount implementing that definition. The recount
mechanisms implemented in response to the decisions of
the Florida Supreme Court do not satisfy the minimum requirement for nonarbitrary treatment of voters necessary to
secure the fundamental right. Florida’s basic command for
the count of legally cast votes is to consider the “intent of