ad info

 
CNN.comTranscripts
 
Editions | myCNN | Video | Audio | Headline News Brief | Feedback  

 

  Search
 
 

 

TOP STORIES

Bush signs order opening 'faith-based' charity office for business

Rescues continue 4 days after devastating India earthquake

DaimlerChrysler employees join rapidly swelling ranks of laid-off U.S. workers

Disney's GO.com is a goner

(MORE)

MARKETS
4:30pm ET, 4/16
144.70
8257.60
3.71
1394.72
10.90
879.91
 


WORLD

U.S.

POLITICS

LAW

TECHNOLOGY

ENTERTAINMENT

 
TRAVEL

ARTS & STYLE



(MORE HEADLINES)
 
CNN Websites
Networks image


Morning News

Election 2000: Attorney George Terwilliger Discusses Argument Before Florida Supreme Court

Aired December 7, 2000 - 11:40 a.m. ET

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

STEPHEN FRAZIER, CNN ANCHOR: For more sense of what actually happened in the state supreme court, let's turn now to one of the participants in this appeal. Let's talk to George Terwilliger, a member of the Bush legal team, who was there listening in.

Mr. Terwilliger, thank you for joining us. What is your early sense of what happened in there?

GEORGE TERWILLIGER, BUSH CAMPAIGN ATTORNEY: Well, I think that it was a very spirited argument. There were a number of really significant questions asked by the justices concerning significant legal issues. Not the least of which was the question they asked of all counsel is: How much does the federal law limit our power to review and provide remedies in this particular election? That's really what the Supreme Court asked this Florida Supreme Court to consider in its decision earlier this week.

FRAZIER: Tell me what it is like for an attorney, when you have prepared for this, and you only get out about 10 words in response to one justice's question, when another jumps in and seems to take the discussion off in a totally different direction. Have you scored a point?

TERWILLIGER: That's the way oral argument goes. I don't think I've ever had an oral argument in an appellate court that went on for more than just a few statements before one of the justice -- judges or justices will jump in with a question. That's really the beauty of it, is that it truly is the opportunity for a dialogue as opposed to just speech-making in a courtroom setting.

FRAZIER: What do you make of Chief Justice Wells' discussion about the plenary power of the state legislature, as opposed to the Constitution of the state of Florida?

TERWILLIGER: Well, that's an important part of the Florida Supreme Court's consideration of this case that is before them now, considering what the Supreme Court did earlier this week.

The Constitution of the United States makes it clear that it is the state legislature, not the state as an entity, but the state's legislature, that does have plenary power to prescribe the method by which electors will be chosen in each state. And one of the issues that is present in this case is the question of what constitutes a change in the law that may be prohibited by federal law that governs elections? or to put it more simply, the federal law prohibits changing the rules of the election after the election has been held.

And of course, it's been our contention from the beginning that that's exactly what's occurred in this case.

FRAZIER: So then your response, when you heard them heading down that road, even before Mr. Boies finished introducing himself to the court, was that this could be going our way?

TERWILLIGER: Well, I don't know so much that it could be going our way, as much as an issue that we think that is very important to the outcome of this case. And if the justices agreed with our views would dictate the outcome is under serious consideration, that's the value of it.

FRAZIER: Now, what do you think will happen next? Did you get any sense from them of what their time frame will be?

TERWILLIGER: Well, everything in -- in all of these cases has moved with incredible dispatch here. So, while I don't think there was any indication directly from the court, I don't think they will be at all dilatory in reaching a decision here.

FRAZIER: We have been told to stand by for about a 30-minute notice of a decision. Does that mean that you are all across the street in a coffee shop just waiting for a cell phone call?

TERWILLIGER: I don't think so, but I hadn't heard that, so the news breaks fast, as we were just talking in this matter.

FRAZIER: Well, thank you for giving us these insights into what it was like for you. Finally, one last question, it just how do you feel, not having to make the remarks, but watching this, and knowing you've got notes maybe that can help your colleague Mr. Richard?

TERWILLIGER: Well, I enjoyed very much participating on the team in both the Supreme Court case and otherwise. This truly has been an extraordinary team effort.

Secretary Baker deserves a great deal of credit for setting the tone for a team effort. And I think we have all really enjoyed working with each other.

FRAZIER: George Terwilliger, normally based in Washington, D.C., for now, anyway, a temporary resident like everybody else -- every other attorney on the east coast of the state of Florida. Thank you for joining us this morning.

TERWILLIGER: Thank you.

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

 Search   


Back to the top  © 2001 Cable News Network. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines.