David Souter

“ The majority might have concluded that "rejection" should refer to machine malfunction, or that a ballot should not be treated as "reject [ed] " in the absence of wrongdoing by election officials, lest contests be so easy to claim that every election will end up in one. Cf. id., at 1266 (Wells, C. J., dissenting) . There is, however, nothing nonjudicial in the Florida majority's more hospitable reading.
3. The same is true about the court majority's understanding of the phrase "votes sufficient to change or place in doubt" the result of the election in Florida. ”

“ But the majority view is in each instance within the bounds of reasonable interpretation, and the law as declared is consistent with Article II.
1. The statute does not define a "legal vote," the rejection of which may affect the election. The State Supreme Court was therefore required to define it, and in doing that the court looked to another election statute, § 101.5614 (5) , dealing with damaged or defective ballots, which contains a provision that no vote shall be disregarded "if there is a clear indication of the intent of the voter as determined by the canvassing board." ”

“ It is true that the Equal Protection Clause does not forbid the use of a variety of voting mechanisms within a jurisdiction, even though different mechanisms will have different levels of effectiveness in recording voters' intentions; local variety can be justified by concerns about cost, the potential value of innovation, and so on. ”