And here's a clue for you...it is thru this action that an impetus is created for future Governor's (Democrats maybe) to feel justified in calling out the Martial Law in order to "save a life".
Really bad precedent to set.
The EXECUTIVE branch is the law-administering and law-enforcing branch of the government. It is patterned along the lines of a large corporation with the governor serving as chairman of the board and the three independently elected cabinet members serving as directors. The governor is elected for a four-year term and may serve two terms in succession. The lieutenant governor is elected as running mate of the governor. Members of the Cabinet are elected to four year terms and may succeed themselves for any number of terms. All of the many agencies and departments that are responsible for programs in Florida State government are also part of the Executive Branch.
The Governor is responsible for day-to-day operations of the state and is the chief law enforcement officer. The governor appoints not only the heads of departments under sole oversight of the governor, but also the heads of departments that are under both the governor and Cabinet's oversight, although at least three Cabinet members must agree to the appointments. The governor also appoints members of several regulatory boards and commissions.
By executive order, the governor may suspend from office any state or county elected official who is not subject to impeachment. The governor cannot suspend the lieutenant governor, Cabinet members, Supreme Court justices, appellate judges, or circuit court judges. They can be removed only by legislative impeachment.
Thought this might be interesting, it's found here:
http://dlis.dos.state.fl.us/fgils/flgov.html
Interestingly, it seems that Bush could have suspended the local sheriff if he defied his orders to stand down...
Pull your pants up, you just exposed to us all your loyalties to the death rule of judges.
And yet, if the governor does nothing, an impetus is created for future judges to feel justified in issuing orders to "take a life."
I would prefer the precedent of a governor clamping down on the judicial branch to the precedent of a governor doing nothing when a citizen is ordered to starve to death. He has the right and duty to refuse unconstitutional orders. And if he is ever out of line in bucking the judiciary, he can be held in check by the legislative branch. Hence the term "checks and balances" that our Founders set up in the Constitution. He could also be voted out of office, unlike many judges.
Our rule of law is not in danger if Jeb Bush acts. Just the opposite. The governor is not meant to be a mere puppet to the judiciary. He is an equal, separate branch, with his primary duty to uphold the Constitution. If he must obey the unconstitutional orders of a judge, and ignore his oath of office, then the rule of law is dead. We would have rule of will, the rule of judges--our supreme masters.
Speaking pragmatically, there is actually no long-term risk if the executive does the right thing, disregards the unconstitutional order, and saves a life. Orders have been disregarded before, over lesser crises, even on the wrong side of justice. And yet, somehow we survived.
Ann Coulter points out:
Democrats have called out armed federal agents in order to: 1) prevent black children from attending a public school in Little Rock, Ark. (National Guard), 2) investigate an alleged violation of federal gun laws in Waco, Texas (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms), and 3) deport a small boy to Cuba (Immigration and Naturalization Service). So how about a Republican governor sending in the National Guard to stop an innocent American woman from being starved to death in Florida? ...In two of the three cases mentioned above, the Democrats' use of force was in direct contravention of court rulings. ...
None of these exercises of military force has gone down in history as a noble moment, but that's because of the underlying purpose of the force, not the fact that force was used.
To the contrary, what has gone down in history as a glorious moment for the republic was when President Dwight Eisenhower (Republican) called out military force of his own. In response to Gov. Faubus' abuse of the National Guard, Eisenhower simultaneously revoked Faubus' control of the National Guard and ordered the 101st Airborne Division to escort black students to school. (Minutes later, Democrats pronounced the Arkansas public schools a "hopeless quagmire" and demanded to know what Ike's exit strategy was.)
As important as it was to enforce the constitutional right to desegregated schools, isn't it also important to enforce Terri Schiavo's right to due process before she is killed by starvation? ...
Given the country's fetishism about court rulings, this may be a rash assumption, but I presume if Greer had ordered that Terri Schiavo be shot at her husband's request – a more humane death, by the way – the whole country would not sit idly by, claiming to be bound by the court's ruling because of the "rule of law" and "federalism." President Bush would order the FBI to protect her and Gov. Bush would send in the state police.
What was supposed to be the "least dangerous" branch has become the most dangerous – literally to the point of ordering an innocent American woman to die, and willfully disregarding congressional subpoenas. They can't be stopped – solely because the entire country has agreed to treat the pronouncements of former ambulance-chasers as the word of God. The only power courts have is that everyone jumps when they say "jump." (Also, people seem a little intimidated by the black robes. From now on we should make all judges wear lime-green leisure suits.)
President Andrew Jackson is supposed to have said of a Supreme Court ruling he opposed: "Well, John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it." The court's ruling was ignored. And yet, somehow, the republic survived.
If Gov. Jeb Bush doesn't say something similar to the Florida courts that have ordered Terri Schiavo to die, he'll be the second Republican governor disgraced by the illiterate ramblings of a state judiciary. Gov. Mitt Romney will never recover from his acquiescence to the Massachusetts Supreme Court's miraculous discovery of a right to gay marriage. Neither will Gov. Bush if he doesn't stop the torture and murder of Terri Schiavo.
Starved for justice
Ann Coulter
March 23, 2005http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43464