Meaning: The quote you provided is a thought-provoking statement by Vincent Bugliosi, a renowned author and attorney. In this quote, Bugliosi is addressing the controversial issue of the Supreme Court's involvement in deciding the outcome of a close presidential election. The quote suggests that it may be preferable for the Supreme Court to select the president, regardless of the election results, if the outcome is closely contested. Bugliosi characterizes this idea as "insane on its face," implying that it is fundamentally illogical or unjust.

The context of this quote is rooted in the historical and political landscape of the United States. Bugliosi's comment likely stems from the contentious and highly publicized 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. In that election, the outcome hinged on the disputed results in the state of Florida, ultimately leading to a legal battle that ended up in the hands of the Supreme Court. The Court's ruling in Bush v. Gore effectively determined the winner of the election, sparking widespread debate and criticism regarding the role of the judiciary in influencing the outcome of a presidential race.

Bugliosi's assertion challenges the foundational principles of democracy and the electoral process. In a democratic society, the legitimacy of the government is derived from the will of the people expressed through free and fair elections. By suggesting that the Supreme Court should intervene in the selection of the president, Bugliosi raises concerns about the erosion of democratic ideals and the potential subversion of the voters' choices.

The quote also touches upon the sensitive issue of partisanship within the judiciary. The Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, leading to a natural association with the political ideologies of the appointing administrations. Bugliosi's statement implies a skepticism about the ability of the Supreme Court to remain impartial and nonpartisan when tasked with such a crucial decision. The fear is that political biases and allegiances could unduly influence the Court's judgment, compromising the perceived fairness and integrity of the electoral process.

Bugliosi's use of the term "insane" reflects a strong and emotive language choice to convey the seriousness of the issue at hand. By labeling the prospect of the Supreme Court selecting the president as "insane," Bugliosi underscores the gravity of the situation and the potential ramifications of such a scenario. This language serves to provoke thought and prompt critical reflection on the implications of allowing the judiciary to wield such significant political power.

In conclusion, Vincent Bugliosi's quote encapsulates a critical perspective on the role of the Supreme Court in determining the outcome of a closely contested presidential election. The quote raises fundamental questions about democracy, the rule of law, and the potential risks associated with judicial intervention in the electoral process. Bugliosi's provocative assertion serves as a reminder of the enduring importance of upholding the principles of democracy and the rule of law in the context of political contests.