Also...........what u could do..........is check what kind of laws the other Southern states have for what George Zimmerman was tried for....................as in age of the victims.......circumstances of the crime................Florida is a So. state in the Bible belt.........they tend to have similar laws........Florida is the most different...............So, Fl of course has the huge Caribbean influence............and to see if those types of laws have changed...........and then u could check other states nationwide.......


Furthermore.............i would examine more Florida laws................to check to see if there is a difference in their laws for minors and adults.............



In the Nov election of 2000..........Haitians...............in Florida........where W.'s brother just happened to be the governor.......Jeb Bush.............................were told that they had the wrong voting location........even though their voter registration card said that they were in the correct place.........compare that to where Pres W. was when he was reading to the kids on 9/11.........Florida............then in 2012...........a black teen............Trayvon Martin is killed by a Latino with an anglo name.........George Zimmerman..............and the law in Florida does not differentiate between minors and adults..........at least not for that particular offense.......odd.........b/c one of the biggest distinctions in law is between adults and minors............Trayvon was 17............so ask this question..............why didn't Florida law make a difference when Trayvon was fatally shot?  Jeb Bush was the governor for like 8 years.........until like 2008 or so..........

Bush v. Gore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bush v. Gore
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued December 11, 2000 Decided December 12, 2000
Full case name	George W. Bush and Richard Cheney, Petitioners v. Albert Gore, Jr. and Joseph Lieberman, et al.z
Docket nos.	00-949
Citations	531 U.S. 98 (more) 121 S. Ct. 525; 148 L. Ed. 2d 388; 2000 U.S. LEXIS 8430; 69 U.S.L.W. 4029; 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Service 9879; 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 6606; 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 26
Prior history	Judgment for defendant, Fla. Cir. Ct.; matter certified to Florida Supreme Court, Fla. Ct. App.; aff'd in part, rev'd in part, sub nom. Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd. v. Harris, 772So. 2d 1273 (2000); cert.granted, stay granted, 531 U.S. 1036 (2000)
Argument	Oral argument
Holding
In the circumstances of this case, any manual recount of votes seeking to meet the December 12 “safe harbor” deadline would be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
Per curiam.
Concurrence	Rehnquist, joined by Scalia, Thomas
Dissent	Stevens, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer
Dissent	Souter, joined by Breyer; Stevens, Ginsburg (all but part C)
Dissent	Ginsburg, joined by Stevens; Souter, Breyer (part I)
Dissent	Breyer, joined by Stevens, Ginsburg (except part I-A-1); Souter (part I)
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. II, amend. XIV; 3 U.S.C. § 5

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000), is the United States Supreme Court decision that resolved the dispute surrounding the 2000 presidential election. Three days earlier, the Court had preliminarily halted the Florida recount that was occurring. Eight days earlier, the Court unanimously decided the closely related case of Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, 531 U.S. 70 (2000).

In a per curiam decision, the Court, by a 5-4 vote,^[1][2] ruled that no alternative method could be established within the time limit set by Title 3 of the United States Code (3 U.S.C.), § 5 ("Determination of controversy as to appointment of electors"), which was December 12. By a 7-2 vote, the Court ruled that there was an Equal Protection Clause violation in using different standards of counting in different counties.^[3] Three concurring justices also asserted that the Florida Supreme Court had violated Article II, § 1, cl. 2 of the Constitution, by misinterpreting Florida election law that had been enacted by the Florida Legislature.