Which of the following best explains the u. s. supreme court decision in bush v. gore?

a. it decided that florida’s first recount should resume in all disputed counties until completed and bush was the winner.

b. it decided that the florida supreme court decision to hold a new recount was unconstitutional and bush was the winner.

c. it decided that the florida supreme court decision to hold a new recount was appropriate according to the constitution.

d. it decided that florida’s first recount was against the constitution and states cannot order recounts in any future election.

and no its not c

The correct answer is B. In Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court decided that the Florida Supreme Court decision to hold a new recount was unconstitutional and Bush was the winner.

Explanation:

Bush v. Gore is the title of a controversial 2000 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that decided the winner of the 2000 US presidential election. The court ruled that the counting of votes proposed by the Florida Supreme Court was contrary to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and that no other counting method could be applied within the statutory deadline. Three judges held that the Florida Supreme Court, in its ruling, also violated Article II of the Constitution by misinterpreting Florida's election laws.

Al Gore, in fact, asked for a manual vote count in only 4 Florida counties, in which the Democratic Party has traditionally had more support, but did not seek a count in those districts that are more Republican-friendly.

Following this ruling, Florida's 25 electoral votes were awarded to George W. Bush, who thus gained 271 electoral votes, while Al Gore had 266 electoral votes.

answer; ///i believe that the correct answer is (a); ///the crystal will