The dramatic struggle over the outcome of the 2000 presidential election presented judges with an extraordinary political challenge, as well as with a historic political temptation. This book offers a critical assessment of how well the courts coped with the competing expectations for impartial justice and favourable partisan results. The book documents how the participants, the press, the academic community, and the public responded during these tension-filled 36 days. The author also provides an overview of the legal strategies and debates - from briefs and oral arguments to final decisions. However, in explaining the behaviour of the courts, he moves beyond an analysis of law to take into account the influences of partisanship, judicial ideology, and broader political and historical contexts. The book pays special attention to the judges whose behaviour generated the most controversy - the battling justices of the Florida and United States Supreme Courts. After reviewing the arguments for and aginst their decisions, it concludes that the five justices behind the "Bush versus Gore" decision acted outside what should be considered the acceptable boundaries of judicial power. The book ends with an analysis of why the justices chose such an unprecedented course of action and an assessment of whether their partisan intervention will have any lasting effect on the Supreme Court's reputation and authority.