"These people have elevated audacity to symphonic and operatic levels. The Florida Supreme Court relied on new law to resolve the election dispute down there"

Vincent Bugliosi’s statement employs vivid imagery and incisive criticism to comment on the actions of certain actors involved in a contentious legal and political dispute, presumably the Bush v. Gore case arising from the 2000 United States presidential election. By stating that "these people have elevated audacity to symphonic and operatic levels", Bugliosi characterizes their behavior as not just bold but almost artistic in its brazenness. The use of "symphonic and operatic levels" implies grandeur, dramatic flair, and a kind of choreographed escalation that goes beyond conventional overreach. This suggests a degree of shamelessness so profound that it practically becomes a performance, something meticulously executed and impossible to ignore.

Bugliosi then turns his focus to the Florida Supreme Court, accusing it of relying on "new law to resolve the election dispute down there". Here, he implies that the court did not limit itself to established legal principles or prior precedents but instead crafted or interpreted the law in novel ways conducive to the resolution they desired. The phrase "new law" could suggest retrospective decision-making or the bending of existing legal frameworks to fit a particular outcome. Bugliosi thus frames the actions of the court as an egregious example of judicial activism, implying a lack of neutrality and consistency.

The power of Bugliosi’s commentary lies in the evocation of artistry, not in the sense of merit but in elaborateness and effect. He sees in these actions a conscious, perhaps even ostentatious, departure from duty-bound restraint, where the normal rules are rewritten mid-performance. Rather than the measured, subdued tones expected of judicial conduct, the proceedings take on theatrical proportions, underpinned by unprecedented audacity. The net result, in Bugliosi’s estimation, is an unsettling spectacle: the law is not just interpreted but dramatically reinvented, and the actors involved do so with a nearly unabashed pride in their rule-bending virtuosity.