Posted on 03/21/2005 12:05:39 PM PST by Wolfstar
Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;
Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, byCession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
That is the point the parents should be attacking..... And if after her death, why couldn't they launch a civil case against the husband for taking her life when he clearly had selfish motive in removing her from lifesaving medical care?
He is only her "legal guardian" because he is considered her spouse under the law. In light of the fact that he has taken up with another woman and had two children by her, he has -- for all intents and purposes -- abandoned his wife. As far as I know, shacking up with another woman and having two children out of wedlock would be irrefutable grounds for divorce in any state in the U.S.
Terri has never been given "due process" in this case, as she has never had her own legal counsel appointed to represent her. She needs a lawyer appointed to act on her behalf, and the first thing that lawyer must do is file for divorce on the grounds that I just described.
I think it is the height of lunacy to argue that this death warrant is inferior to a death warrant on a criminal. Terri Schiavo has Habeas rights.
You are one of the brightest FReepers we have here.
Don't disappoint me.
Please take a look at your Constitution.
Reread Scalia's opinion. He is arguing for State legislatures against Federal courts. It is for "citizens of Missouri to decide, through their elected representatives." It is an argument for legislatures and against courts assuming powers. It does not address a Federal legislative decision only a Federal judicial decision that seeks to override a State legislative decision. This is not the case here.
The early and original interpretation of the 14th Amendment was one that left enormous autonomy to the several States even though it brought many of their actions and decisions under Federal review. Even in this early, more reasonable interpretation, Congress had the power to grant individuals the right to appeal State court decisions to Federal courts for review of their due process rights.
The 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause gives Congress power over State courts in that it allows State laws and State court decisions to be subjected to review by Federal courts regarding individual Citizen's due process rights. This is not a Constitutional stretch; it is the very purpose of the Equal Protection Clause. Thus, it is perfectly Constitutional for Congress to legislate that an individual Citizen's due process rights are entitled to Federal review.
Section. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
If you believe Congress should not intervene on principles of Federalism you are more than entitled to that view and it is not without merit. If you believe that Federal courts ought not to decide for themselves what types of State decisions they can and can't review until Congress passes "appropriate legislation" you probably won't find a single dissenting voice in this neighborhood. But Congress does have clear Constitutional authority to grant Federal jurisdiction for review of individual due process rights over State court decisions.
I agree. Praying as I type...
Simple question.
Does Terri have a lawyer?
From all that I have read and heard, I believe that she does not. I've been trying to learn all I can about this case but there is such a long history and the news is happening so fast right now that I haven't been able to read it all. As I said though, from everything I've seen, I do not think that she has an attorney - not one of her own anyway. Others may be better informed than I, so I will leave that question to who have been following this longer and know more about it.
Anyone? Does Terri have her own legal representation (wothout connection to the attorney's of Michael Schiavo or her parents)?
And I suppose the next midnight vote will be a raise for themselves.
Am I right?
Florida has a law permitting starvation and dehydration.
It is Congress who has created the US federal court system. In 1866, Congress created our "illustrious" 9th circuit of today, a renumbered 10th circuit. And Congress has abolished courts in the past like the California circuit court in 1862.
I suppose all of the legal decisions already handed down make this impossible but couldn't someone try it? Has anyone tried to do this? It's unusual but kids are taken away and put in foster care all of the time. Why NOT a disabled woman who is clearly not being given treatment and is being denied therapy that was ordered by her physicians?
--------------------------------------------------------
Out of the question? That cannot be.
So in other words - Terri Schiavo is being sentenced to death and has no legal representation?
No legal representation and brain damaged ~~
The Supreme Court ruled in June 2002 (Atkins v. Virginia) that it was unconstitutional to execute the mentally retarded.
Why would we then order Terri executed?
Im gonna leave out "cruel and unusual" punishment for the moment. Im sure we don't starve death row prisoners to death do we?
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.