A ruling is expected today from the US Supreme Court on Governor Bush's challenge to the Florida Supreme Court's ruling last Friday calling for an immediate manual recount of all "undervotes" in Florida counties in the Presidential election. On Saturday, the high court granted a stay by a 5-4 vote to the Governor that stopped the recount pending a decision by the court. In an unusual move for a stay, Justices Scalia and Stevens wrote brief statements for the order. Scalia's remarks seemed to many observers to intimate that the court was likely to ultimately side with Bush, for whom, Scalia stated, a recount could cause "irreparable harm" in terms of the "legitimacy of his claim to the Presidency." Meanwhile, Stevens, in a strongly worded dissent, cited three troubling precedents he perceived as likely to result from such a decision, including an overturning of a long-established deference to state supreme courts in the matter of interpreting state law. Editorials from a number of major dailies on Monday, including the New York Times and the LA Times, made the unusual move of not simply disagreeing with the Court's decision, but suggesting it could undermine the Court's legitimacy by appearing to be politically partisan. If the Court rules in Bush's favor, most observers, including Gore backers, believe the Vice-President will be forced to concede. Any other sort of ruling, though, could send the whole issue back to Florida for the courts and state legislature to sort out.