And basically ruled that the law did not intend her to be kept alive for a new trial. I disagree with them and agree with the dissent opinion that this was the intent of the law. So, again, I don't think the dissenter was the activist interpreting the law according to their desired outcome. I think this more accurately describes the majority.
I wonder if the 11th orders the trial judge to order the feeding tube and then the trial judge drags his feet.
No, he basically ruled that their arguments for injunctive relief failed under current law, which was not affected by the newly-passed law.
I disagree with them and agree with the dissent opinion that this was the intent of the law
The majority opinion specifically shot that one down. The dissenting judge was being activist.