Posted on 03/19/2005 8:00:19 AM PST by beyond the sea
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Friday that subpoenas issued by Sen. Mike Enzi compelling Terri Schiavo to appear at a March 28 congressional hearing made it a crime to disconnect her feeding tube - and threatened anyone who interfered with her testimony with jail.
In a statement issued by the majority leader's office, Frist said:
"Federal criminal law protects witnesses called before official Congressional committee proceedings from anyone who may obstruct or impede a witness attendance or testimony."
"More specifically," said the Senate's top Republican, "the law protects a witness from anyone who - by threats, force, or by any threatening letter or communication - influences, obstructs, or impedes an inquiry or investigation by Congress.
"Anyone who violates this law is subject to criminal fines and imprisonment," Frist said.
His comments appeared to be directed at Florida state judge George Greer, who brazenly defied the Enzi subpoena on Friday and ordered Schiavo's starvation to commence.
Frist's statement echoed comments by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who said late Friday that he intended to charge Greer with contempt of Congress.
"No little judge sitting in a state district court in Florida is going to usurp the authority of Congress," he complained.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
LOL! They are 'acting'. Just like they've been acting like fiscal conservatives for the past years. They're acting alright.
They're good at it, aren't they???
Remember...after all is said and done, there's a lot more said than done.
Since you're an expert on the laws in this case, please tell us, specifically -- by name of statute -- what "law" Judge Greer is "on the right side of." It clearly isn't the Florida law that requires clear and convincing proof of a patient's desire to have nutrition withheld, because there is no proof in this case that rises to the standard of clear and convincing. The judge has gone beyond the limits of the law, and of his authority, either because he's incompetent (that's what I vote) or he has a powerful personal agenda (I don't think he's smart enough to have such, I think he's just a bumbling hack who wasn't smart enough to do it right and is too stubborn to admit he did it wrong). But then, you know the "laws" of Florida. Please educate us in how the Judge is on "the right side" of them.
I hear you, but do you think something should be done to give the parents their daughter at this time?
And we know the Marshalls know how to conduct armed commando raids to seize children in Florida. Why not go after a little state judge?
Issueing a summons for a person to appear before
congress that has been in a vegatative state for fifteen
years is not playing politics? Use common sense.
"Federal crime.
Federal Marshalls."
My nephew is an Ex-Marine (if there is such a thing) who was an Embassy Guard and is now a Federal Marshal operating out of Oregon. I'm sure, though, that he would take pleasure in making a trip to Florida.
"Actually as I understand it the judge is on the right side of the law. Although, something should have been done long before this."
In a parallel universe maybe. Ignoring a congessional supoena is NOT on the right side of the law. Regardless of whether he appreciates the motivation for the supoena's they are legal, prescribed and inviolate.
ping
He hasn't because he's legally blind. He can barely see the shape of the hand in front of his face
If Ashcroft were still attorney general, we might see some action.
I live where people get arrested and jailed for starving their horses.
I guess it's really important in the State of Florida to save the sea turtles but God forbid they can't have one disabled handicapped innocent woman live.
Back to being the President, I thought his oath was to defend and protect,and uphold the Constitution and also to protect us from evil doers, and that includesa tyrannical out-of-control judge.
I don't understand why, after the supeona's were issued, that the Marshalls weren't send immediately to the hospice where Terri is, to prevent the tube being pulled.
Seems to me it would have been in the best interest of the Congress and Terri.
Why no response, other that rhetoric, to the Judges order and actions?
LOL.
If Frist actually had a pair, I'd be a bit more hopeful now.
The best part is that Judge Greer is legally blind and very likely cannot see her from further than six inches.
Do you expect him to physically go fight with the judge? He's committing his prestige to the fact that action will be taken.That's what he can do in his position; it's up IMHO to the executive to actually take physical action. If the executive (the US Attorney, and his bosses in DoJ and ultimately the president) do not take action, don't expect the Senate Majority Leader to do so. But if he doesn't take action, making Frist look foolish for talking tough, the president courts trouble with his legislative agenda.
If he does of course, The New York Times will criticize him. We shall see which concern moves Mr. Bush.
I don't approve of starving her to death but I do
feel she would be better off in the hereafter.
I would feel that way if it was me or one of my family.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.