WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court tossed the presidential hand-recount case back to the Florida Supreme Court on Monday, saying the state court's reasoning in extending a deadline for counting votes was unclear.

The high court's action was overshadowed within hours by a Florida judge's rejection of the overall election challenge by Al Gore — a ruling that could wind up making the U.S. Supreme Court case moot.

Three days after a historic session of arguments, the nation's highest court unanimously set aside the ruling by Florida's top court that let Al Gore pull within 537 votes of George W. Bush's total. But the justices avoided a decision on Bush's claim that the extended deadline for recounted votes was unlawful.

The justices' unsigned opinion said the Florida Supreme Court ruling was unclear and asked that court to restate its legal reasoning.

The U.S. Supreme Court said, "After reviewing the opinion of the Florida Supreme Court, we find that there is considerable uncertainty as to the precise grounds for the decision. This is sufficient reason for us to decline at this time to review the federal questions" raised by Bush's appeal.

"They punted," said Mary Cheh, a George Washington University law professor. "They've just thrown this hot potato back to the Florida Supreme Court."

Bush's team described the Supreme Court action as a win. At the Texas governor's mansion, Bush said, "We're pleased with the decision. I think America ought to be comforted to know that the highest court in the land is going to make sure the outcome of this election is a fair outcome."

Gore adviser Greg Simon played down the high court's action as "just a timeout. ... This doesn't move the ball either way."

Florida Supreme Court spokesman Craig Waters said the court would ask both sides to file briefs in response to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling, but that the seven members of Florida's high court had not decided whether new oral arguments were needed.

If the Florida Supreme Court reinstated its Nov. 21 decision, that would let Gore keep the votes that cut Bush's margin from 930 votes to 537. Bush then could seek to overturn such a decision by filing a new appeal to the nation's highest court. The justices would decide again whether to grant or deny review.

But the case could become moot if Gore loses his effort to win more votes to put him over the top — the subject of the state court ruling against Gore on Monday.

University of Virginia law professor A.E. Dick Howard said that with Monday's high court ruling, "There is no big win for anyone."

Bush was able to get the Florida Supreme Court ruling set aside, Howard noted, but Gore also got a chance for that court to reinstate that ruling and reinforce its legal underpinnings.

"Neither side goes away empty-handed," Howard said.

Pepperdine University law professor Douglas Kmiec said the Supreme Court issued its ruling "in a way that shows enormous respect" for state courts.

The justices asked the Florida court to explain to what extent the Florida Constitution's guarantee of a right to vote limits the state Legislature's authority to choose presidential electors.

The federal Constitution allows state legislators to govern the choice of electors, and during last week's argument Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia questioned whether the state court was trying to use state law to trump the federal Constitution.

The justices also asked the Florida court to clarify what consideration it gave to an 1887 law that makes states' choices of presidential electors binding on Congress as long as disputes were resolved under laws enacted before the election.

During Friday's argument, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had suggested the court might send the case back to the Florida court to clarify such issues.

Howard said that during last week's argument "the justices were all over the map. ... Today's order is the only way I could imagine them doing something unanimously."

———

On the Net: For the Supreme Court web site: http://www.supremecourtus.gov