COLUMBUS - An Ohio State University law professor is pointing out that some members of the media are incorrectly reporting the outcome of yesterday's U.S. Supreme Court decision on the Florida election.

At issue are reports that seven members of the court found that the Florida Supreme Court had violated the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

"That is not true," according to Ruth Colker, a nationally recognized authority on constitutional and disability law. Colker says the unsigned decision was agreed to by five of the nine justices.

"The ruling is only the opinion of five conservative justices," says Colker. "Four members dissented and did not concur with the majority opinion. They did not sign on to any aspect of the majority opinion," explains Colker.

Colker, who holds the Heck-Faust Memorial Chair in Constitutional Law, says reporters made the error because the unsigned per curiam (by the court) decision says that "'seven justices of the court agree that there are constitutional problems with the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court that demand a remedy." But she says the reporting of a seven-to-two decision is wrong because Justices Souter and Breyer never "demand" a remedy. "They clearly state that the court never should have accepted jurisdiction to begin with," clarifies Colker. "Souter and Breyer's dissent, and not the per curiam, which they did not join, represents their opinion."

###