However, the President is not above the law and he did all that was legally in his power to do so. We do not live in a dictatorship or a monarchy where our leader can do as he pleases. We're a nation of laws and violating those laws, even if we disagree with them, is not something the President, governor, or anyone else should be doing. If you don't like the laws, get them changed.
This is a trite cliche from another, far different country than the America of 2005. That phrase dates to the long bygone era when the laws of this nation were grounded in the natural law concepts of the Constitution and the Biblical roots of Anglo-American common law. The prevailing legal philosophy in modern America, held by the Supreme Court, save Scalia, Thomas, and maybe Rehnquist, is positivism, which holds that law should not be based on eternal principles, but on the needs of society as perceived by legislators and judges. Law, as modern jurists use the term, is relativistic and situational, not objective and permanent.
I was not referring to President Bush, but to Governor Bush, in whose jurisdiction the Schiavo case resides. Secondly, we are talking about human life, not a school bond or the placement of a waste dump. Extraordinary measures are necessary in this case, rather than hiding behind the excuse of procedure, as Governor Bush has.
The fact is that the judiciary has asserted its supremacy over the legislative and executive branches, a process dating back to the early days of the Republic, when Chief Justice John Marshall asserted the authority of the Supreme Court to determine whether legislation passed by Congress is constitutional, in contrast with English common law and the intent of the Founding Fathers. After World War II, that power was expanded by the Warren Court and its successors to act as a super-legislature in effect. School integration, "one man one vote" state and local legislative bodies, abortion on demand, abolition of local laws banning pornography, and most recently abolition of the death penalty for convicted criminals under the age of 18 are examples of the Supreme Court acting as a super-legislature.
At one time, judicial overreach was challenged by Presidents such as Jackson and Lincoln. But that was a bygone era. Our GOP leaders are not made of the same stuff.
As for your statement, "If you don't like the laws, get them changed.", that is hollow rhetoric. Judges on the Federal level are appointed for life. While many states elect their judiciary, these elections are usually heavily influenced by special interest groups, especially trial lawyers, and the voters are generally clueless relative to the candidates' judicial philosophy. Since the other branches of government have not effectively challenged judicial power, judges feel that they have carte blanche, and their perception is wholly correct.
As far as it goes, the GOP holds the Presidency and both houses of Congress, thanks in part to the hard work of Christian conservatives whom some FReepers scorn because the latter have swallowed the mainstream culture's anti-Christian kool-aid. The same control exists in Florida with regard to the governorship and the legislature. Yet all are powerless before the might of the judiciary.
The political system in this nation is seriously broke. Frankly, I don't know that it can be fixed, humanly speaking.