In the 5- 4 opinion, the justices described what they saw as three violations of the equal protection clause in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

They said the Florida court's order failed to include over-votes in the manual recount; that all ballots were recounted in some but not all counties; and that there is an "absence of a uniform, specific standard to guide the recounts."

All four dissenting justices presented separate, strongly worded opinions in opposition to the court's ruling.

In the most dramatic dissent, Justice Stevens called the federal questions of the case "insubstantial," and added that the Supreme Court's decision, in siding with the Bush team's appeal, reflected an "unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity" of the Florida Supreme Court.

His colleagues' decision, Stevens said, undermined the credibility of the nation's highest court.

"Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear," Stevens wrote. "It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."

Ginsburg wrote that the Supreme Court used the wrong standard in strictly adhering to the Dec. 12 Electoral College deadline. Breyer said there was "no reason" why such a political issue should have been taken up by the court, recommending that Congress resolve the dispute.