Morning News

Gore Campaign Attorney Jeff Robinson: Campaign has High Hopes for Appeal to Florida's High Court

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back to Tallahassee -- just talking with Phil Beck from the Bush team.

Now want to bring in Jeff Robinson from the Gore team to talk more about not only appeal but also what we saw yesterday.

Before we get to the state Supreme Court -- how big of a blow was Judge Sauls' ruling from last evening?

JEFF ROBINSON, GORE CAMPAIGN ATTORNEY: Obviously we were disappointed; but everybody has always known that this case was going to be resolved by the Florida Supreme Court, and that's where we are.

HEMMER: We were just talking with Phil Beck, and we've talked with other Republican attorneys -- they believe that you leap-frogged the case. In other words, you went to end for a remedy and a solution before you established in law that there was something wrong.

Did you agree with that or in retrospect would you go back and reverse that?

ROBINSON: No; we don't believe that that's what happened. We believe that we put into evidence the ballots, not as a remedy, but to show the court -- the issue before the court is, were there legal votes not counted. How do you determine that? You look at the ballots. You look and see if there were ballots that weren't counted that had Al Gore written on them, and that's how you determine the issue, amongst the other evidence that was offered.

HEMMER: Yes, you mentioned the ballots; and yesterday when we talked we always mention time, too. Today is December 5; the calendar keeps on ticking down and until someone in a court of law holds up a ballot to examine it, doesn't that work against you in a severe way right now?

ROBINSON: Well, clearly we've always believe that this matter needed to proceed expeditiously. We've been delayed at that at times by the other side. We think there's still time -- but yes, time is of the essence.

HEMMER: When I talk to members of your team, this is what they tell me: they tell me because it was such a decisive and clear decision it's now easier to argue at the appellate level. I'm not an attorney; spin me if you like, but tell me, why would you believe, at this time, knowing it was so against you yesterday, that it's now easier to argue it on appeal.

ROBINSON: The one thing that Judge Sauls did do is he was very precise and clear as to why he was ruling what he was ruling. So there's no question for the Florida Supreme Court as to what it has to consider. The issues are framed up for it. He made clear legal rulings, and we believe those rulings could be erroneous, but there's no question about what he did.

HEMMER: What's your clearest point, then, to these seven justices as to why your side should get another shot?

ROBINSON: I think that there are two. First of all, that clear evidence that was admitted -- the ballots -- was not considered. Secondly we believe that the judge, in a number of areas, applied a clearly erroneous legal standard. Those are the two main focuses.

HEMMER: You know, though, the history in Florida does not work in your favor. The state Supreme Court, many times, upholds a lower court's decision as opposed to reversing it or overturning it. How do you feel about that right now? Do you feel behind the eight ball, do you feel in a corner?

ROBINSON: No; I mean, that's the case everywhere, that appellate courts typically uphold the decisions of lower courts, but they reverse; they reverse when there's clear error. We believe that there's error here, and we don't think that that's really a factor.

HEMMER: And if this court does not take your case, is it over?

ROBINSON: It's not for me to say whether it's over or not. This case is over, but I'm not sure that everything is over.

HEMMER: Jeff Robinson, appreciate your time this morning.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com