However, with the election so close (and given the fact that the Democrats do not want to be seen as disenfranchising two critical electoral college states) both Michigan and Florida now seem to have been strengthened by recent events. Howard Dean has already discussed re-running the primaries. If such a re-vote takes place, the states will have greatly increased their power. They will both be able to play a vital role in tipping the balance and deciding the Democratic winner.

Even if they do not re-run the vote, and the race goes to a deadlocked convention, Michigan and Florida will be on everyone's minds. Hillary Clinton, who effectively ignored her party's threats--and then won the uncontested elections in both states, as hers was the only name on the ticket--will be pushing to seat the states' delegates. If there is a convention battle, this will be the critical issue, one that could decide who will be the party's nominee.

Michigan and Florida have been held up as offenders, willingly breaking the rules and possibly costing their voters seats at the convention. But in the end, they have shown that the two political parties do not have the power to truly threaten any state. Rather than being sidelined from the nominee selection, Michigan and Florida delegates have instead managed to put themselves right in the center of the action.

Nelson v Dean:

Judge "Hinkle said the Democratic National Committee has a right to set its schedule for primaries. The national party penalized Florida because it broke party rules by jumping the state's primary date ahead to Jan. 29.

To rule otherwise would be a free-for-all with all 50 states, Hinkle said. He gave the plaintiffs the choice to re-file under the voting rights act against the state of Florida if they choose."

The 1981 Supreme Court decision for the case Democratic Party of U.S. v. Wisconsin, 450 U.S. 107 clearly states that the Democratic National Committee can make and enforce the rules on the delegate process.

"The State has a substantial interest in the manner in which its elections are conducted, and the National Party has a substantial interest in the manner in which the delegates to its National Convention are selected. But these interests are not incompatible, and to the limited extent they clash in this case, both interests can be preserved. The National Party rules do not forbid Wisconsin to conduct an open primary. But if Wisconsin does open its primary, it cannot require that Wisconsin delegates to the National Party Convention vote there in accordance with the primary results, if to do so would violate Party rules. Since the Wisconsin Supreme Court has declared that the National Party cannot disqualify delegates who are bound to vote in accordance with the results of the Wisconsin open primary, its judgment is reversed.

It is so ordered."

TAMPA - The first legal challenge to the Democratic National Committee's refusal to seat Florida's delegates to the party's national convention next year was thrown out of federal court Friday.

Calling the matter "an intra-party dispute," U.S. District Judge Richard Lazzara concluded the arguments made by Tampa-based Democratic voter and political consultant Victor DiMaio contained no legal basis for challenging the national party. Lazzara wrote, "The Supreme Court has consistently recognized that national political parties have a constitutionally protected right to manage and conduct their own internal affairs, including the enforcement of delegate-selection rules and the decision as to which state delegates it will recognize … ."