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.”
Interesting. The Federal statute doesn't qualify the circumstances wherein the withholding of nutrition and hydration "goes over the line." It is careful about the dispnsing of medicine restrictions, e.g., "no assisted suicide." I'm looking at 14402(b)(2) and (4)
Like I said.
I just don't get what congress is doing.
If they mandated that the courts review it 'from the beginning' and also 'mandated' that the Judge order the tube reinserted, then why in the world aren't they confronting the courts and telling them they are WRONG?
They have the power to force the courts to follow the 'law' that they just passed, by seem to timid to do it.
Was it just their contention to push a law just so they could say "well, we tried"?
It's no wonder the Judiciary is running roughshod all over the constitution.
Our elected 'representatives' are letting them.
I guess it just means 'We the People' have no more rights, unless the courts decide we do.
Sickening.
The Republicans SHOULD HAVE SPENT ALL their political capital to save Terri. Terri's death will hurt them in 2006 & 2008.
It's the Republican political version of Vietnam.
Uninformed? You're telling me?
I've seen freepers say she never had a CAT scan, no neurologist visited her, she was not represented by an attorney, etc. For days.
Did you know that according to court documents the Schindlers admitted they knew Terri was PVS?
Did you know that court documents show that Terri's doctors recommended Michael pull the tube in '93?
Did you know that he didn't have to ask the courts to make the determination but he did? The court makes mention of that fact.
Did you know that Terri has been represented by an attorney? Her fourth guardian ad litem, named Wolfson, is an attorney. And the Schindlers adored him, despite the fact that he admitted she was PVS. Just like the other three GALs.
For Michael, this is the difference between attempted murder and murder one.
Many Libertarians don't think things through.
cuz they're more concerned about their careers. I have had it with them. Torpedoes be damned, I am not supporting the GOP anymore. Support the Constitution Party.
Well it sure will be interesting to see what kind of a raise
they give themselves this year..
Or what other perks they come up with
"Congressional Republicans who took extraordinary measures
Yeah right. So they worked late.
That's the end for me. I really don't care whether I am irrelevant anymore, my money is just as well spent on local candidates in the Constitution Party."
I've been teetering in that direction myself.
But let's see if the Reps in Congress are really washing their hands without trying further;
-OR-
Are they deciding not to push federalism harder (some here have said they DO have the power to issue a stay themselves even though it would be hard to get the votes) and signalling to Jeb Bush that he now has a clear field to make the case that everthing's been tried, he HAS to step in and fix what the courts won't?
A state remedy is still the best remedy, and many in Congress know that. We'll see how it unfolds.
“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.”
I hate to say it but I don't believe he is right about this. Read the opinion of the court and in particular, their reference to Frist's comments on this subject. It seems clear that Frist believes that the court is not required to do a de novo review if they don't think it is necessary.
Correct me if I'm wrong about that. I didn't study it in detail but my initial take is that the Pubbies didn't write strong enough language in the final bill to do the job.
Congress cant do squat about the Court. Law gave the court juridiction but the courts dont have to take any case.
I think it was Michigan, and IIRC, it wasn't adultery in general but someone living in a situation such as Michael's, where he has clearly gone on personally and has potential conflict of interest, cannot retain guardianship of his spouse. Sounds reasonable to me. Someone else pointed out yesterday that Georgia already has such a law in place. No doubt other states do as well.
You misunderstand. The courts have ruled that TERRI's wish is to die by starvation. Michael just happens to be one of three people who entered evidence regarding TERRI's wishes.
I think the court got this fact wrong. No rational person chooses death by starvation. If I'm PVS, I want to die by freezing, not by starvation.
What doctors? Terry Schiavo pig has kept the entire world out of that room for years. That Nazi pig is nothing but Scott Petersen with a big mouth. How would anyone know what the "doctors" really said????
Furthermore, the governor of Florida is charged with enforcing Florida law. If they were really serious about this thing, Terri's husband would be under serious investigation for attempted murder, human rights violations etc. Michael might find it in his best interest to just divorce Terri and let her parents care for her. But nobody wants to play hardball.
This whole thing is about political grandstanding at the expense of Terri..... and that's worse than starving the woman to death in my book.
Good one, Antoninus.
The Schindlers told Michael it was time to move on with his life. They admitted this in court documents when they also admitted they knew Terri was PVS.
I think it's a ridiculous law.
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.