Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 03/22/2005 5:21:34 PM PST by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


An emergency filing to the high court that seeks to reinsert Schiavo's feeding tube while the case is litigated would go first to Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee who oversees such appeals out of the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Kennedy, who has staked a moderate position on social issues, would have the option to act on the petition alone, although on previous emergency requests involving Schiavo he has referred the matter to the full nine-member court.


2 posted on 03/22/2005 5:22:58 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

One of the problems here is if Justice Kennedy reaches out to Uganda for his legal precedents. Their judges still rule on witchcraft charges.


4 posted on 03/22/2005 5:26:51 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
Kennedy, who has staked a moderate position on social issues

Sorry.......when I reached this point I could not continue for this is a blatant LIE!!

5 posted on 03/22/2005 5:28:55 PM PST by PISANO (We will not tire......We will not falter.......We will NOT FAIL!!! .........GW Bush [Oct 2001])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

Where are all the rabid terri supporters?


6 posted on 03/22/2005 5:32:34 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

WHY are people still calling this a "right to die" case? Call it what it is...a "right to kill the innocent" case.


10 posted on 03/22/2005 5:56:42 PM PST by pkp1184
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
"I can't imagine the Supreme Court wants to get bogged down in the intricacies of who should be making the decision in this particular case," said Pamela Karlan, a constitutional law professor at Stanford and former Supreme Court clerk. "The court tends to defer to states on family-law issues."

Well, honey, you don't seem to realize that this isn't in the federal realm now to decide a family-law issue.

It's about time to recognize that this isn't about the impropriety of spousal rights, legal guardianship or power of attorney. This is about judicial activism that favors one party over the other on grounds other than the merits of the case, existing law and core principles that underlie all law in this land, that is, our sovereign rights as individual human beings.

The Constitutional "scholars" who have been arguing that "due process has been done over and over again" fail to recognize, whether by ignorance or intent matters not, that due process is not applied merely by going through the motions of procedure but must be manifested with the spirit of impartiality and observed by following the intent of the letter of the law not just its course.

That is why Section 1 of Amendment XIV closes with a conditional statement concerning equal application of the law. It indicates, in fact mandates, that due process must be applied without prejudice or the entire process fails Constitutional muster.

...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The honored legal standing of a spouse's power of attorney should not be in question here and I don't believe it has been. I would not support Congress, the President or anyone else who challenges its traditional standing.

It is time now, however, to actively answer the question raised in this case; "has Judge Greer elevated spousal right of attorney to an absolute that exceeds the individual inalienable right to life?" which is stretching that right beyond tradition or reason. The tradition I speak of is the American tradition embodied in the DoI, "we hold these truths to be self-evident", that life and liberty are the most honored rights of all. In fact they are held as sacrosanct.

If the Dems want to invoke more medieval or Mideastern traditions of spousal rights like bigamy, beating and the right to buy or sell a wife they are welcome to. That's probably not quite as repugnant as infanticide.

Let us also remember that the Jews were duly processed in Hitler's Germany. They rarely failed to follow procedure to the letter.

12 posted on 03/22/2005 7:03:20 PM PST by TigersEye (Are your parents Pro-Choice? I guess you got lucky! ... Is your spouse?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nightshift; Ohioan from Florida; floriduh voter; cyn; pc93

ping


13 posted on 03/22/2005 7:04:01 PM PST by tutstar ( <{{--->< Impeach Judge Greer http://www.petitiononline.com/ijg520/petition.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
Some interesting points in the article:

"The Supreme Court ruled 15 years ago that a terminally ill patient has a constitutional right to decline medical treatment. But it also said that right was not absolute, holding that a state may impose a high legal burden on a family to show a patient had actually consented.

She did not leave a "living will" indicating her wishes. Her parents also say Michael Schiavo has a conflict of interest as his wife's legal guardian because he has a longtime girlfriend, with whom he has children.

"One big worry is that, obviously, she's not brain dead. But is she really in a 'persistent vegetative state'? If she isn't, no one should be deciding to cut her off," said Martha Field, a Harvard law professor. "We're also in a place where it's important to draw the line in consent because, realistically, it isn't Terri's choice, it's her husband's choice."

The Supreme Court has not always deferred automatically to states on the delicate question of life and death.

14 posted on 03/22/2005 8:22:38 PM PST by FairOpinion (Liberals want life for murderers/terrorists and death for defenseless innocents.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson