[george wythe]

Judge Baird's decision in pdf file.

[supercat]

Judge Baird's decision in pdf file

Sometime I'll have to see if I can get through the whole thing without losing my lunch, but I found it particularly interesting that Judge Baird is so vocally opposed to the way the way the branches of government are supposed to work:

• The legislative branch lays out the principles for what should be done
• The executive branch decides when and how to carry out the legislative directives.
• The judiciary examines the facts of cases to determine when the executive branch's actions are legitimately following the legislative schema.

Judge Baird attacks "Terri's Law" on the basis that it gives Jeb Bush discretion. Beyond the fact that, contrary to Baird's claim, Jeb Busb's discretion under on the law was hardly "unlimitted" (the law gave a significant number of requirements that had to be met for Jeb Bush to issue a stay) is the general fact that nearly all laws are subject to some discretionary interpretation by the executive branch.

If Baird's logic in this cases were applied to other statutes, most traffic regulations, zoning rules, building codes, and all sorts of other things would have to be tossed out. After all, unless the legislature explicitly requires the placement of a traffic signal at a particular intersection, what authority does the Florida executive have to demand that anybody stop there?

My personal interpretation of things is that Judge Baird is being absurdly sloppy in his legal work here. While it may be legally conceivable that the invocation of the law in this particular case might be thrown out of court on the basis of the "facts" (assuming Baird's reality bears the same relation to most people as Greer's), to throw out the statute on the basis that it grants some measure of discretion to the executive branch is a truly bizarre and absurd argument.