[Wolfstar]

You may be right. If this case goes up the food chain of federal courts, that may be one of the arguments used by the lawyers for the parents. If so, I'll be interested in seeing how the courts rule.

BTW, thank you for your reasoned argument. It's much appreciated since the point of this thread is to get people to think about the Constitutional implications of this case.

[holdonnow]

I have to go, so please don't misconstrue my absence as acceptance of your position, but as this thread goes on, you now argue that the federal court has jurisdiction. But it has jurisdiction explicitly because of Congress's action, nothing else. Even the most activist federal judge would not have taken up this case but for Congress's constitutional intervention. If the federal judiciary thought otherwise, presumably this hearing wouldn't even ben occurring today on jurisdictional grounds.