[InterceptPoint]

Frist's comments in this regard had to do with mandating the court to issue an injunction, direct order to insert the feeding tube. The court said no injunction, and they are right, the statute and plain discussion on the floor of the Senate agrees with the contention that they weren't directly ordered to issue an injunction.

That sounds right. But what about the de novo review. Although without an injuction the issue will be moot, are you inferring that the legislation does require a de novo review?

[Cboldt]

... are you inferring that the legislation does require a de novo review?

I believe it uses exactly those words. SHALL perform a de novo review. What is left discretionary (but was assumed to be a gimme, under the facts in hand), was the issuing of injunctive relief until such time as the evidence relating to the ultimate judicial order could be reviewed. Instead, the Federal Courts concluded, after something they called a de novo review, that they would have ruled the same way that Greer did, basically.