I never said I had a law degree. She was given de novo that was reviewed in federal court with the same outcome.
Which was then upheld by 11th circuit.
And will probably be denied cert by the Supreme Court.
So wrong in so many ways? The first federal judge did not review the facts de novo he only ruled on TRO(injunctive relief)to replace the tube on a temporary basis. He against the new Law did not consider new evidence but using the record from the previous court rulings ruled that there wwas not a likelihood of success and refused the TRO. The 11th district said that he did not make such an irreversible error as to warrant them to overturn it,so they denied the TRO.
THere is still the Law of COngrees that says she gets a trial de novo. But the Courts are refusing to enforce it,by refusing to give her TRO,because without it she will be dead before the trial can start,
Do you understand?
So stop making statements that just demonstrate your absolute ignorance of both the facts and the law in this case,