You still have not answered my question.
Calpernia said: "I didn't say he shouldn't. I said if he did the focus should be Greer and Co. Not specifically Terri."
Go back and read how executive orders have been written in the past and you will see the president has a great deal of leeway in these matters. The fact is this: the Constitution protects every person's right to life, liberty and happiness and in this case this right is being cruelly taken from a young woman. The president has the right to step in and intervene through executive order.
Why do you think the judiciary has more power than the Constitution grants, yet feel the president has so little?
That is the true misunderstanding here. The 3 branches are supposed to balance one another, not take over as the judiciary is doing here. If the president steps in with executive order he won't be taking over - he'll be intervening so the witness (deemed such by Congressional Subpoena) can remain alive and so the "powers that be" can haggle through the details later.