The founding fathers wanted to ensure that no one faction of the population could choose the president. how does the supreme court in the 2000 election challenge this original intent?

a) because the supreme court could be considered a faction

b) because the supreme court did not vote fairly

c) because the supreme court had its own agenda

d) because the supreme court cannot involve itself in matters of elections

The best answer to the question: How does the Supreme Court in the 2000 election challenge the original intent? Would be, A: Because the Supreme Court could be considered a faction.

Explanation:

Although essentially the Judicial branch was designed to become a neutral power, without any leanings towards a particular party, or a particular form of government, in the 2000 election, this line was crossed and many Americans started believing that this ideal of neutrality on the part of the Supreme Court, was crossed. Originally, the Court is supposed to become an interpreter of the Law, the U.S Constitution and other legislation, that impacts the outcomes of different activities in American life.

In the 2000 election, the Court had to intervene when a lawsuit was presented to challenge the election of George W. Bush as President, in the case Bush vs. Gore. The point was that in Florida´s election, it seemed that there had been a miscount of votes, which favored Bush, over Gore.

Although the initial suit was taken up by the Florida Supreme Court, the matter reached all the way to the U.S Supreme Court, and they stepped in, on account of supposed violations to the Fourteenth Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause. Arguing protection of Floridian voters´ rights, the Court stopped the counting and made a decision. In this form, they favored Bush, over Gore, and thus were considered to have become partisan. Something the Founding Fathers had not intended to happen when they Framed the Constitution. They became a faction at that point which highly favored Bush and his party, by basically giving him the Presidency.  

Because the Supreme Court could be considered a faction.

Explanation:

- "the civil rights movements"

- "following the american civil war and abolition of slavery, the united states entered a period known as reconstruction, during which black americans continued to suffer from disenfranchisement, racial segregation, and economic oppression. beginning in the early 1950's, black americans launched a series of major campaigns of civil resistance, emphasizing the need for nonviolent protests and civil disobedience."

"such as the montgomery bus boycott of 1955-56, a campaign launched by rosa parks against the policy of racial segregation of the public transit system in alabama. “sit-ins” became popular across the american south, particularly in greensboro, north carolina, increase national sentiment."

- "the counterculture movement"

- "counterculture began to develop in the united states following the rise of conformity in american culture during the 1950s. by 1963, youth, particularly those of the white middle class, began rejecting the cultural standards and normality of their parents, opting for progressive attitudes instead. the movement gained momentum as the civil rights movement became increasingly successful and as the u.s. military intervention of vietnam began to take a negative turn."

"hippie counterculture moved further into popular culture following the summer of love in 1967 when thousands of people came together in the haight-ashbury neighborhood of san francisco. along with greenwich village in new york city, haight-ashbury became a hub for the counterculture movement."