Posted on 03/31/2005 3:11:22 PM PST by Crackingham
I don't want to hear promises, I want to see action.
The judge held the held the hearing, the Schindler attorneys present no new evidence, no reason for overturning the original decision. So the judge ruled against them. He abided by the letter of the legislation.
"we have to follow our laws and abide by the courts" -- problem is, the courts don't follow the law!
"I was saddened to learn of Terri's death. My heart goes out to her family and all those who worked so hard to save her life. Our legal system should have saved her, but instead, ordered that she be killed by thirst and starvation. Our judicial system today has lost the respect of the American people who expect their judges to be just, not hard-hearted. Their legalities overruled our humanity.
In an extraordinary session, Congress passed a law that should have given Terri a new trial, with de novo review of her case. This meant that her case would be given in-depth consideration by a federal court to ensure that her rights as a profoundly disabled person were not violated. Given that a thorough and unbiased review would take weeks for the court to hear the evidence, the directive from Congress was for the court to order that Terri's food and water would be restored, so that she would not die before her Constitutional rights to due process were exhausted. However, the judge ruled against her case with only a few hours of consideration and without hearing the necessary evidence. In doing so he sentenced Terri to a painful death and also sounded the death knell for the rule of law in America.
As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I will not allow a federal judge to ignore federal law without consequence. We must rein in the runaway judiciary and hold judges to their oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. If a judge refuses to follow the law, he is no longer just and impartial and must be removed from office.
Not all prayers are answered as we wish. On behalf of the Fifth District and on behalf of Terri herself, I will work tirelessly to rebuild a culture of life and a recommitment
Whitmore held a hearing. Gibbs did not present any "de novo" facts for consideration; all he did was regurgitate complaints about the way Greer handled the state case.
You get what you pay for with a pro bono barrister.
""The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior,""
Translation:
the law I helped write was inadequate, so I need a scapegoat.
Congress doesn't have the Constitutional authority to order a de novo review. Any move by Congress to tell the Courts how to conduct in-court procedures is a direct violation of the Constitution.
I thought the Republicans had already committed suicide by supporting Terri? So if they are going to lose all their seats in '06 because of it, might as well make good use of the next two years right?
In point of fact I dismiss they'll pay a heavy price for this on election day but I argue the logic is flawed. A party that has already committed "suicide" has nothing to lose by doing the right thing and balancing our branches the way they should be.
The federal judge deferred to all factual findings made by Judge Greer. This was not de novo review. It was a sham.
It ain't gonna happen!
Here is the link to sing a petition to Impeach Judge Greer I found on another FR Forum. There are more then 34,000 signatures already (including mine). Let's pass it on.
http://www.petitiononline.com/ijg520/petition.html
That's a non-sequitar. Delay isn't talking about anything that doesn't follow the law.
Muffled acquiesence on the part of the Bush administration's spokesman.
WASHINGTON - U.S. Congressman Steve King today issued the following statement regarding the passing of Terri Schiavo:
"I was saddened to learn of Terri's death. My heart goes out to her family and all those who worked so hard to save her life. Our legal system should have saved her, but instead, ordered that she be killed by thirst and starvation. Our judicial system today has lost the respect of the American people who expect their judges to be just, not hard-hearted. Their legalities overruled our humanity.
In an extraordinary session, Congress passed a law that should have given Terri a new trial, with de novo review of her case. This meant that her case would be given in-depth consideration by a federal court to ensure that her rights as a profoundly disabled person were not violated. Given that a thorough and unbiased review would take weeks for the court to hear the evidence, the directive from Congress was for the court to order that Terri's food and water would be restored, so that she would not die before her Constitutional rights to due process were exhausted. However, the judge ruled against her case with only a few hours of consideration and without hearing the necessary evidence. In doing so he sentenced Terri to a painful death and also sounded the death knell for the rule of law in America.
As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I will not allow a federal judge to ignore federal law without consequence. We must rein in the runaway judiciary and hold judges to their oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. If a judge refuses to follow the law, he is no longer just and impartial and must be removed from office.
Not all prayers are answered as we wish. On behalf of the Fifth District and on behalf of Terri herself, I will work tirelessly to rebuild a culture of life and a recommitment
Now that is what we should be hearing -- and action following those words. If anything good can come of this terrible tragedy, this injustice that should never have stained American jurisprudence, then here it will be: punish these arrogant black-robed bastards to the fullest extent of the law.
"I don't want to hear promises, I want to see action."
Congress could have passed a law banning the pulling the feeding tube. They didn't. So know they'll whip up the fury at the judges to deflect blame from themselves.
Political pandering from day one.
Congress has the constitutional authority to set the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts. This includes mandating the standard of review to be applied. SCOTUS can disagree...but not the lower courts.
Actually, the problem is that the religious right will most likely not repay the loan of goodwill they've received from the GOP. After getting the Republicans to put the nuclear option and Social Security reform on permanent hold to meet their demands, the religious right is now making noises of bolting the party because President Bush and Governor Bush didn't send in the Marines and the National Guard to Wacoize Schiavo, Felos, and Greer.
I was listening to Rush this morning and learned that one of the things the congress changed in order to get their bill through was to change the wording. They did not mandate a de novo, because some congress critters were afraid of a mandate. They just asked the judges to take another look from the beginning.
Out-of-staters signing a petition like this might feel good, but it's ultimately worthless.
IF YOU INVESTIGATE YOU HAVE OUR SUPPORT!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.