[KDD]

Michael Schiavo will be a very wealthy man by the time the lawsuits are finished flying. No matter how everyone FEELS about this case, this action by the legislature and Jeb is no less then legislative usurption of the judicial branch.

Personally...I wouldn't want to live without a cerebral cortex. I wouldn't even be able to thank the nurse aide who changed my diaper 3 or 4 times a day.

And if Terri really didn't want to live in this condition then a terrible injustice has been done.

The FSC will hear this case you can be sure...Anyone care to bet on how they'll rule?

[shhrubbery!]

The FSC will hear this case you can be sure...Anyone care to bet on how they'll rule?

Now that there is a conflict between the legislative and judicial branches, you are probably right that the obnoxious SCOFLA will try to throw its weight around, just as it did in Bush v. Gore.

In that case, we may see SCOTUS slap the arrogant puppies down again.

Bets? Sure. SCOTUS 1, SCOFLA 0.

[narses]

You are funny. This is legislation that saved a life. It reined in a corrupt judiciary that was allowing a guardian to starve to death his wife. The seperation of powers is not a means by which the judiciary is supreme. The three branches are coequal, and as a check and balance, two branches (legislative and executive) can over-rule the third. Civics 101.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

If Terri didn't want to live how the heck has she continued to fight for life under all of this abuse and neglect ,and all of attempts to starve her and dehydrate her? Do you think she has no will of her own?

[tardissa]

Have you considered that perhaps Greer committed judicial usurption of the legislative branch?!?

Judges are neither kings nor gods, though it seems that lately they have been treated as such. And they should never be immune to uphold the spirit of the law rather than twist the letter of the law.

[kennedyd]

No matter how everyone FEELS about this case, this action by the legislature and Jeb is no less then legislative usurption of the judicial branch.

Who passed the right-to-die legislation in the first place? Does the judicial branch pass laws now? The function of the judiciary is to interpret law that the legislature passes. A new law can invalidate an old law, and any decisions the courts made based on the old law. Are you claiming that any time the legislature changes the law they are usurping the authority of the judicial branch?

[F.J. Mitchell]

"Anyone care to bet on how they'll rule?"

They will likely stick a wet finger up and see which way the wind is blowing, and rule whichever way that keeps them from being empeached.

You are too easy, anyone with a conscience would not take your money.

[Hyacinth Bucket]

And if Terri really didn't want to live in this condition then a terrible injustice has been done.

This is exactly the crux of the issue, no one knows exactly how Terri would have wanted things. There is only Terri's husband's word that she would not want to live if left in this kind of condition.

The problem is that he has all kinds of conflicts of interest to be the sole decision-maker for her. There seems to be circumstantial evidence that he might have tried to harm her and collect the insurance. He already is living with another woman and has a child with the same woman. And Terri's family is willing to take on the full responsibility of caring for her.

So if there is no medical will to go by and the husband is a shady character, it is better to err on the side of life, don't you think? Besides slowly starving someone who cannot communicate clearly is definitely a cruel way to die that even animals are not subjected to when they are put to "sleep".

[NonValueAdded]

... is no less then legislative usurption of the judicial branch.

Not exactly. The legislature and the executive branch make the laws, the judiciary enforces them. From time to time the judiciary either acts contrary to the intent of the legislature or makes a decision where the law is not clear. Nothing precludes the other branches from taking corrective action. This isn't preclusion, it is exactly how the system is designed to work, providing that the new law passes constitutional muster. Remember, a constitutional amendment overrules even the supreme court so the word of the judiciary is not ultimately final.

Is this the best way to make law? No. It is quite possible that there will be loopholes found or unintended consequences as a result of hasty action. However, something had to be done and done quickly. There is time to perfect things later.

[Mfkmmof4]

None of us want to live as Terri does BUT none of us want to die a death by starvation. That is not God's will.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Forbid that the Gods in the Judiciary should circumvent the intention of the lawmakers. Perhaps you missed the relevent portions of the US Constitution in your youth. If you want to live in a society of the all-powerful learned elite, IMO you should move to Red China, Cuba, N. Korea, etc.

[kkindt]

You don't know what it is like to live with out a cerebral cortex - you assume you do because you think you only think with it but your soul thinks without it.