Posted on 03/23/2005 9:01:53 AM PST by areafiftyone
Congressional Republicans who took extraordinary measures last weekend to prolong the life of Terri Schiavo say there are no further steps Congress can take to intervene.
A federal district-court judge declined yesterday to issue an order to reinsert Schiavo’s feeding tube. Schiavo’s parents have appealed the ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.
The court ruling concerning the Florida woman whom doctors say has been in a “persistent vegetative state” for 15 years prompted a strong statement from House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who said that the court violated the “clear intent of Congress,” which passed a emergency Schiavo bill last weekend.
Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), who drafted legislation that served as starting point for a narrower bill passed by the Senate, said, “I am deeply disappointed by this decision today, but I believe this matter now belongs in the hands of the judiciary.”
DeLay went further, saying, “Congress explicitly provided Terri Schiavo’s family recourse to federal court, and this decision is at odds with both the clear intent of Congress and the constitutional rights of a helpless young woman.
“Section two of the legislation we passed clearly requires the court determine de novo the merits of the case — or in layman’s terms, it requires a completely new and full review of the case.
“Section three requires the judge to grant a temporary restraining order because he cannot fulfill his or her recognized duty to review the case de novo without first keeping Terri Schiavo alive.”
DeLay did not, however, signal any further steps that Congress might take.
Section three of the Schiavo law states that the judge “shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights” of Schiavo.
But Senate floor statements appear to contradict DeLay’s interpretation. An earlier version of the bill included language mandating that the court issue a stay. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) objected to the provision and negotiated to have it removed. GOP leaders needed the consent of Senate Democrats to move the bill in a speedy fashion, and during a House floor speech DeLay later thanked Senate Democrats for their cooperation.
During Senate consideration of the bill Sunday, Levin engaged in a colloquy, or conversation on the floor, with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), stating his belief that the bill would not require the court to issue a stay.
Frist agreed, saying, “Nothing in the current bill or its legislative history mandates a stay. I would assume, however, the federal court would grant a stay based on the facts of this case because Mrs. Schiavo would need to be alive in order for the court to make its determination. Nevertheless, this bill does not change current law, under which a stay is discretionary.”
A House Judiciary Committee aide said that the final law was stronger than the initial Senate bill and that it did require the judge to issue a stay.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) also released a statement, saying that he was very disappointed by the court ruling.
Time is working against Republicans who would like to do more on Schiavo’s behalf. At best, if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, lawmakers might decide to file friend-of-the-court briefs on behalf of Schiavo’s parents.
Legislative provisions negotiated by Senate Democrats during the hours before Congress acted last weekend appear to have had a substantial effect on the case.
When Frist first moved to take up a bill dealing with Schiavo in the midst of a budget debate, Democrats objected. One who objected was Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who was concerned that the legislation could have an effect on an Oregon law dealing with assisted suicide.
As a result of negotiations with Wyden, the final law included language stating that it should not be construed to give new jurisdiction to courts regarding a state’s assisted suicide law. Wyden did not object to final action, even though he opposed the bill.
Democratic aides said their members decided to allow the bill to move forward once it was changed so that it was narrowly tailored to the Schiavo case. An ABC News poll released Monday showed that 70 percent of respondents thought the congressional intervention was inappropriate.
“Just because members oppose a bill doesn’t mean they exercise every procedural option to block it,” one Senate Democratic aide said. The bill eventually passed the Senate on a voice vote, after no senator demanded a recorded vote be taken.
Meanwhile, Frist wrote Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) yesterday urging quick action on the part of the state Legislature: “The extraordinary nature of this case requires that every avenue be pursued to protect her life.”
Ahem.
You do understand don't you that dozens of doctors and therapists have attended to Terri through the years and that even the Schindlers admit she's PVS?
She's had four guardian ad litems and all of them say she's PVS.
Regardless, I'm sure that you, on the internet know better. Let's just agree to disagree shall we?
Why don't you read post #339.
Oh, then you must have missed the report on ABC tonight. Get a load of this.
ABC News; Peter and their doctor guy (can't remmber his name, but he's always on as their doctor) have a copy of the papers that Jeb Bush is filing today with the "new" evidence that she might not be PVS.
The doctor read from the last page; the "new" doctor was in the room for 90 minutes, during that time she did NOT exhibit ANY of the things they claim -- no sounds, no eye movement, no recognition -- NOTHING.
But he then went on to say something like, "But you get the sense she can."
Did you mean to post the same thing that I responded to?
Every day it gets worse and worse and worse.
Did you hear ABC tonight. I got it from another freeper who sent it to me via freepmail:
ABC News; Peter and their doctor guy (can't remmber his name, but he's always on as their doctor) have a copy of the papers that Jeb Bush is filing today with the "new" evidence that she might not be PVS.
The doctor read from the last page; the "new" doctor was in the room for 90 minutes, during that time she did NOT exhibit ANY of the things they claim -- no sounds, no eye movement, no recognition -- NOTHING.
But he then went on to say something like, "But you get the sense she can."
I meant to post what ABC said tonight about this doctor. Which had me laughing so hard maybe I posted it incorrectly somehow.
I take it you didn't read the afidavit that I linked then. I'm not sure why you would find this funny.
... or one of the terrorist prisoners at Gitmo...
Are you talking about the doctor who has NEW evidence that Jeb Bush mentioned in his press conference?
If you are I'm laughing because this is what he said (see below). I don't consider that NEW evidence, do you?
ABC News; Peter and their doctor guy (can't remmber his name, but he's always on as their doctor) have a copy of the papers that Jeb Bush is filing today with the "new" evidence that she might not be PVS.
The doctor read from the last page; the "new" doctor was in the room for 90 minutes, during that time she did NOT exhibit ANY of the things they claim -- no sounds, no eye movement, no recognition -- NOTHING.
But he then went on to say something like, "But you get the sense she can."
Did you read his afidavit? Or do you just rely on somebody telling you what was said on ABC news?
Do you know how many people watch ABC News? Like my mother and dad. Every night. Like clockwork.
So when I got two freepmails about this matter, I called my mom. I didn't post for about 15 minutes because we were talking.
She was beside herself that Jeb Bush would call this new information.
Now you may wish to believe what this NEW doctor has to say. But his OWN words were replayed on ABC. His OWN words. If he doesn't like those words, he shouldn't have said them.
But you have to admit, it sounds foolish doesn't it?
Now I grant you, I cannot tell you whether it's the same doctor or not, because you have not provided that doctor's name, and I DON'T watch ABC news.
I really don't care how many people watch ABC news, it doesn't mean that what they report is fact.
I've seen you on a couple "Terri" threads now. Are you just going around trying to start stuff with right-to-lifers?
She's being very nice and reasonable. If you don't like her posts, just skip over them.
Oh, hello, again, sinky. glad you came in to assume the position of defending the wolves...as usual.
Did you read my long answer about amputations and the Schindler's admitting in court they would keep her alive regardless of her wishes?
That is not love. At least not in my family. They will honor my wishes.
And you will notice in that answer that I did answer your question, you just didn't like the answer.
Right to lifers? What do they have to do with a woman who is PVS?
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.