I can't disagree with anything you have written. I have propoosed a law, which will not be passed. And Terri's parents will almost certainly lose on the merits, if it gets to that rather than being mooted by her death, in federal court. But in the ensuing year, all kinds of stuff could pop up out of the legal woodwork. And there you have it.
What is you're proposed law? Also, I agree that the parental efforts will almost certainly prove futile in the long run, however long that proves to be.
I want to reiterate that what I'm especially hostile to is this concept of "non-precedent" acts (whether judicial rulings - there have been a few - or legislative actions such as what Congress did this weekend). In my view, they make a mockery of the rule of law and ultimately weaken the stability of our society that depends on that.
If Terri Schiavo and/or her parents have a right to further relief under the constitution (and I have no firm opinion on way or the other on that), then everyone should have the equivalent right. And there is no such thing as a precedent that sets no precedent IMHO.
Citizens should be able to have confidence in the reliability and continuity of the law, and this seeming trend away from that principle disturbs me. This is not a singular instance, but it's the one at hand.
Oh, and although it's not a singular instance of arbitrary legal action of whatever kind, it is quite remarkable for being an Act of Congress.
"I have propoosed a law, which will not be passed."
How do you PROPOOSE a law?