Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 03/28/2005 9:18:27 AM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: fishtank

I thought the 11th Circuit had approved Elian's deportation. Am I remebering wrong?


2 posted on 03/28/2005 9:20:59 AM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Yes, but the liberal judges turned their heads and did nothing about it. If a conservative violated a court order, the crap would hit the fan.


3 posted on 03/28/2005 9:21:19 AM PST by Jersey Republican Biker Chick (People too weak to follow their own dreams, will always find a way to discourage yours.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank
I've thought about this too.

I'm surprised Rush brought it up because he sure was critical of the abduction of Elian (and rightly so IMHO).

ML/NJ

4 posted on 03/28/2005 9:22:39 AM PST by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

That is the difference between a court ruling that goes against conservatives and one that goes against liberals.

It also shows that Jeb and Dubya have the power to step in and save Terri,,,if they really wanted to.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110006480

The sad case of Terri Schiavo has raised passions not seen since five years ago. Then another bitterly divided family argued in Florida courts over someone who couldn't speak on his own behalf: Elian Gonzalez.

In both cases, those who were unhappy with the courts' decisions strained to assert the federal government's power to produce a different outcome. The difference is that in Mrs. Schiavo's case, Congress backed off after passing a bill that merely asked a federal court to hear the case from scratch, something that U.S. District Judge James Whittemore declined to do. By contrast, those who wanted the federal government to intervene in Elian Gonzalez's case went all the way, supporting a predawn armed federal raid on the morning before Easter to seize the 6-year-old boy despite a federal appeals court's refusal to order his surrender.

Both cases were marked with hypocrisy and political posturing galore. Both times some conservative Republicans talked about issuing subpoenas to compel the person at the center of the case to appear before Congress; they swiftly backed down when public opinion failed to support their stunt. Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, argued that by opposing Elian's return to his father in communist Cuba, conservatives were abandoning the principle that "the state should not supersede the parents' wishes." In the case of Terri Schiavo, many conservatives who normally support spousal rights decided that Michael Schiavo's decision to abandon his marital vows while at the same time refusing to divorce his wife rendered him unfit to override the wishes of his wife's parents to have her cared for.

But liberals have gotten off easy for some of the somersaulting arguments they have made on behalf of judicial independence and states' rights to justify their position that Terri Schiavo should not be saved. Many made the opposite arguments in the Elian Gonzalez case.

Elian was plucked from the ocean off the coast of Florida on Thanksgiving Day 1999. after his mother died in an ill-fated attempt to bring him to freedom. Before he became a political football and Fidel Castro demanded his return, the Immigration and Naturalization Service granted him immigration "parole," which gave him the right to live in the U.S. for one year until his status was determined. Because Elian was underage, his fate would therefore be decided by local family courts. On Dec. 1, the INS issued a statement saying, "Although the INS has no role in the family custody decision process, we have discussed the case with the State of Florida officials who have confirmed that the issue of legal custody must be decided by its state court."

Then the Clinton administration reversed course after protests from the Castro regime reached a fever pitch. On Dec. 9, the INS declared its previous position "a mistake" and said that state courts would not have jurisdiction in Elian's case. They claimed that because Elain was taken directly to a hospital he was therefore never formally paroled into the U.S.--even though he was then turned over to his Miami relatives rather than the INS. "Technically, he was not paroled in the usual sense," said a Justice Department spokesman. But she could come up with no previous case in which a Cuban refugee had had his parole revoked and then had the INS move to return him to Cuba.

But it quickly became clear that was the INS's intent. Over the Christmas holidays the agency dispatched agents to Cuba to interview Elian's father, Juan Miguel Gonzalez. After the interview, Mr. Gonzalez told reporters the agents and an accompanying U.S. diplomat had assured him Elian would be returned. The Clinton administration disputed those statements, although one of the government officials later privately acknowledged they had been made. Nonetheless, INS bureaucrats in Washington quickly determined that a man who had abandoned Elian and his mom for another woman was a "fit parent" who could "properly care for the child in Cuba." No public consideration was given to the fact that his father, a member of the Communist Party, might have been coerced.

If a state court had been allowed to hear the custody case, INS officials would not have been able to testify as to what Mr. Gonzalez told them to support his claim because it would have been hearsay. He would have had to come to the U.S. to testify on his own, subject to cross-examination. Even if the state court had granted him custody, it would have had to decide whether it was in the child's best interest to be returned to Cuba.

That's what Judge Rosa Rodriguez of Florida Family Court, complying with the original INS ruling, tried to do when she ruled in early January 2000 that her court had jurisdiction over the boy and gave Elian's great-uncle legal authority to represent him. Her order contravened an INS ruling that only Elian's father could speak for the boy and that he should be immediately returned to Cuba. Attorney General Janet Reno than promptly declared that Judge Rodriguez's ruling had "no force or effect." At the same time, INS officials assured reporters that under no circumstances did they intend to seize Elian by force.

The stalemate continued for another three months. On Thursday, April 20, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals--the same court that rejected the pleas of Terri Schiavo's parents last week--turned down the Justice Department's request to order Elian removed from the home of his Miami relatives. Moreover, the court expressed serious doubts about the Justice Department's reading of both the law and its own regulations, adding that Elian had made a "substantial case on the merits" of his claim. It further established a record that Elain, "although a young child, has expressed a wish that he not be returned to Cuba."

The Reno Justice Department acted the next day to short-circuit a legal process that was clearly going against it. On Good Friday evening, after all courts had closed for the day, the department obtained a "search" warrant from a night-duty magistrate who was not familiar with the case, submitting a supporting affidavit that seriously distorted the facts. Armed with that dubious warrant, the INS's helmeted officers, assault rifles at the ready, burst into the home of Elian's relatives and snatched the screaming boy from a bedroom closet. Many local bystanders were tear-gassed even though they did nothing to block the raid. Elian was quickly returned to Cuba; because he was never able to meet with his lawyers a scheduled May 11 asylum hearing on his case in Atlanta became moot.

Of course, there are differences between the Gonzalez and Schiavo cases. But clearly many of the people who approved of dramatic federal intervention to return Elian to Cuba took a completely different tack when it came to the argument over saving Terri Schiavo. Rep. Frank makes a compelling argument that Congress took an extraordinary step when it met in special session to create a procedure whereby the federal courts could decide whether Ms. Schiavo's rights were being violated. He may have a point when he accuses Republicans of "trying to command judicial activism and dictate outcomes when they don't like" rulings. But where were Mr. Frank and other liberals when the Clinton administration decided to sidestep a federal appeals court and order an armed raid against Elian Gonzalez? While Mr. Frank allowed that the use of assault rifles in the Elian raid was "excessive" and "frightening," he also defended the Justice Department's view that "of course [agents] had to use force."

According to some reports, Gov. Jeb Bush considered seizing Mrs. Schiavo, à la Elian, and taking her to a hospital so she could be fed. But he did not do so. "I've consistently said that I can't go beyond what my powers are, and I'm not going to do it," the governor says. Janet Reno and the Clinton administration showed no such restraint when it came to Elian Gonzalez.


6 posted on 03/28/2005 9:24:07 AM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank
The 11th Circuit Court had said "No" to Johnny Reno, but she went ahead and took custody of Elian anyway.

And it was wrong, and we still hate her for it.
We should hate either Bush just as much if they flaunted the law so brazenly.

SO9

12 posted on 03/28/2005 9:28:32 AM PST by Servant of the 9 (Trust Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

So what is the point? Is Rush really saying that since J. Reno violated the law, it is OK for us to do the same? I don't think that is a road I want to go down.


16 posted on 03/28/2005 9:32:01 AM PST by Double Tap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Rush: "In a perfect world the public would be outraged that we are killing an innocent citizen. I am not for lawlessness, in spite of this situation. The judges are acting like they are not equal with the other branches of government."


47 posted on 03/28/2005 9:56:42 AM PST by sheikdetailfeather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Rush: "In a perfect world, the brances of govt. would have have cooperated with one another instead of one branch (judicial) usurping the other. The congress would have enforced the subpenas, the court would have done what was asked to look at the details of the case."


52 posted on 03/28/2005 10:02:04 AM PST by sheikdetailfeather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Seems the courts were not 'do able' as Iraq for Executive action. But it is possible that Reno had more ba-ls.


53 posted on 03/28/2005 10:02:07 AM PST by ex-snook (Exporting jobs and the money to buy America is lose-lose..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank
Well I am finished with Rush, he is circling the wagons around an obvisiously flawed GOP position. Rush, even said that we must obey the law even if the law is immoral, unconstitutional and results in the death of innocents. Rush is now a kool-aid drinker in my book and his hands are dirty.

It could trun out that the bots are right, that just a few right wing crazies see this as a basic, soul revealing good v evil fight. It is plain as day to me. You do not stave to death a helpless woman. I am shocked that aparently only right wings crazies "get it". Even my favorite Laura Ingram backed off. Oh well I guess I am now offically one of the nut jobs here at Free Republic.

56 posted on 03/28/2005 10:09:52 AM PST by jpsb ((warning right wing nut job posting))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank
Rush made some excellent points. I had forgotten that Clinton had lost in the 11th Circuit, and used a lower judge to get a warrant. This right there puts the lie to notions that Jeb Bush or George Bush could not have acted. All they needed was a warrant. Hey, wait, can't you get a warrant to protect a witness to a Congressional investigation or a DCF inquiry?????? They could take that application to a judge in DC or in Tallahassee.

Failure to act in the face of evil is cowardice that empowers evil.

68 posted on 03/28/2005 10:23:00 AM PST by Defiant (Amend the Constitution to nullify all decisions not founded on original intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Rush is FOS!

That last caller had it pegged and Rush did such a song and dance and spin routine I couldn't believe it!

Just what law would DCFS be violating by going in and getting Terri? None! They have the law on their side. The only thing the MIGHT be violating is a corrupt judge's order. By what authority does this judge get the power to go against the will of the people, as expressed through their legislators?


83 posted on 03/28/2005 10:50:32 AM PST by Critter (America, home of the whipped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Reno was never vilified for her actions. The ball is now in the Bush's court.


102 posted on 03/28/2005 11:17:17 AM PST by LifeOrGoods?
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank; All
In Honor of Terri Schiavo

Please let it load -- it's 11 mb.

Have headphones or sound on.

special thanks to lafroste for generous technical and web assistance.

137 posted on 04/02/2005 7:49:16 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (God rest Terri Schiavo. God save the rest of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson