Jeb Bush is courtingdereliction of duty

Worldnetdaily ^ | 3-29-2005 | Dr. Alan Keyes

[EternalVigilance]

Posted: March 29, 2005 11:44 a.m. Eastern

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

The Florida state constitution declares unequivocally that in the state of Florida "the supreme executive power shall be vested in a governor … ." The word supreme means highest in authority. There can be no executive authority in the state of Florida higher than the governor. No state law can create an executive authority higher than highest in the Florida constitution. Therefore no court order based upon such a law can constitutionally create such an authority.

If the governor tells the local police in Pinellas County to step aside, they must do so, or else be arrested and tried for an assault on the government of the state, which is to say insurrection.

(If Gov. Jeb Bush fears that for some reason they would question the authority of his representatives, then he should take the necessary law enforcement officials to Tampa in person, thus making the situation crystal clear.)

Since Florida's highest law grants him supreme executive power, the governor's action would be lawful. No one in the Florida judiciary can say otherwise, since the whole basis for the doctrine of judicial review (which they invoked when they refused to apply "Terri's law") is that any law at variance with the constitution is no law at all.

Gov. Bush has said that he recognizes the injustice being done to Terri Schiavo but is powerless to stop it. He is obviously not powerless, and his view of injustice is fully warranted.

The Florida state constitution declares: "All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty … ."

The word "inalienable" means that the rights in question cannot be given away or transferred to another by law. Now, by allowing Michael Schiavo to starve his wife to death, Judge George W. Greer transfers to Schiavo the exercise of her right to life, doing on her behalf what the Florida state constitution declares she herself could not do (since an inalienable right cannot be given away).

Schiavo's decision, and any element of the law it is based on that has the same effect, are therefore unconstitutional on the face of it.

The governor of Florida cannot be obliged to enforce unconstitutional edicts, nor can he be faulted for acting to stop an evident violation of the constitution. In his oath as governor he swore to "support, protect and defend the Constitution and government of the United States and of the state of Florida."

As supreme executive, he is obliged to act in their defense, and no court order can relieve him of this responsibility.

Any order by Judge Greer that seeks to prevent him from doing his sworn duty, as he sees fit, is invalid, and any attempt by the judge to incite armed forces to enforce his order would be an act of judicial insurrection against the constitution and government of Florida.

The judge may have whatever opinion he pleases, but when he attempts to use force to back it up, he breaks the law, going against the constitution of the state, which is to say against the supreme law in Florida.

In Federalist 81, when Alexander Hamilton lists the safeguards against "judiciary encroachments on the legislative authority," he cites in particular "its total incapacity to support its usurpations by force."

Accepting the notion that judicial orders at any level may constitute an executive power superior to the chief executive would give the judiciary just such a forceful capacity.

When every judicial decision carries the implied threat of armed insurrection, a key safeguard of liberty and self-government is removed. If any state governor, or the president of the United States acts so as to encourage the judiciary to assume such executive power, or the people to believe that it may constitutionally do so, he undermines the integrity of all our constitutions, and of American self-government as a whole.

This constitutes a grave dereliction of duty and would in saner times clearly be grounds for his impeachment by a legislature intent on defending the Florida constitution against "judiciary encroachments."

By God's grace, however, Terri Schiavo still lives, and Gov. Bush may yet act to redeem himself and his constitutional authority. Courageous action would be an act of statesmanship, defending the integrity of our constitutional system and the ultimate sovereignty of the people.

We have long been awaiting the statesman who could turn a crisis into such healing. Like Ronald Reagan before him, Jeb Bush could prove himself such a man. For Terri's sake and for the sake of constitutional self-government in America, he should act now. For failure to do so, he has no excuse.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Be sure to visit Alan Keyes' communications center for founding principles, The Declaration Foundation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Former Reagan administration official Alan Keyes, was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Social and Economic Council and 2000 Republican presidential candidate.

[spodefly]

And .. typically, you have no reasoned response. I rest my case.

Hopefully, you have rested your case.

Why don't you just decide once and for all that I am not worthy of your time. You have misread 2 posts of mine on 2 different threads today and chased me around telling me how 'typical' are my unreasoned responses, while using YOUR ALL CAPS EMPHASIS TRICK and condescending jabs at my intellect. If I am so inferior to you in reasoning and intellectual capabilities, you should ignore me, pity my pathetic existence as a clueless moron unworthy of the benefit of your infinite wisdom on all matters under consideration. But then again, I am not the one asserting that judges make laws that cannot be circumvented by Executive and legislative powers.

[CyberAnt]

I believe you're using the word "officer" to mean a police officer - and you would be incorrect.

If you look at the list in Section 1 of who the named "officers" are: a sheriff, a tax collector, a property appraiser, a supervisor of elections, and a clerk of the circuit court ... that the Governor has power over and can remove - there is not one police officer among them. I'm getting to the Sheriff issue ..

But your analysis is flawed regarding the Governor being able to order other police officers around.

The Governor cannot and does not have the authority to order any police officer to do anything contrary TO THE LAWS THE POLICE OFFICER HAS SWORN TO UPHOLD. The local police officers were upholding the COURT ORDER of Judge Greer - which means the Governor did not have the authority to order them to disobey it.

And .. the DCF's actions are subject to approval by the circuit court (Judge Greer) - because it says that the circuit court has 24 hours in which to rule for or against any DCF order for removal. The judge ruled against the removal and issued a court order keeping the DCF from acting .. and now you're trying to say the Sheriff should have been removed because he defied a DCF order - NO HE DIDN'T - HE OBEYED A COURT ORDER from Judge Greer ..??

The DCF cannot just arbitrarialy charge into some place WITHOUT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT REMOVAL. Of course Greer was not going to allow them to take Terri .. but it was worth a try .. even though I suspect they knew Greer would not approve.

So .. again .. we have someone who is distorting the laws just to try to blame Jeb Bush for not acting.

[EveningStar]

The Florida state constitution declares unequivocally that in the state of Florida "the supreme executive power shall be vested in a governor … ." The word supreme means highest in authority.

This does not give the governor the right to ignore a judicial ruling. Yes, he's the supreme executive power but there are three branches of government.

[TheDon]

Certainly not by Keyes, as I had the same opinion before reading his article.

[michigander]

The Governor cannot and does not have the authority to order any police officer to do anything contrary TO THE LAWS THE POLICE OFFICER HAS SWORN TO UPHOLD. The local police officers were upholding the COURT ORDER of Judge Greer

So, "the COURT ORDER of Judge Greer" is constitutionally equal "TO THE LAWS THE POLICE OFFICER HAS SWORN TO UPHOLD"?

[TheDon]

Chapter 765, Florida Statutes 2004

See in particular, sections 765.401 The proxy. and 765.404 Persistent vegetative state. See also the definitions, in particular,

(10) "Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance and hydration, which sustains, restores, or supplants a spontaneous vital function.

Spooky stuff, eh? I wonder if other states have similar laws?

[CyberAnt]

"The judge bluffed, and Jeb folded."

Okay -- I'm going to start from square one.

First of all - DCF issued an order to remove - lawmen were gathered - the order was filed with the circuit court (Judge Greer), and the circuit court had 24 hours to respond - for or against the removal order.

You're correct that DCF can do this in emergencies when they believe a child's life is in danger - and I don't think Judge Greer would stop them. But this was to remove Terri - and Judge Greer - legally - ISSUED A COURT ORDER STOPPING THE DCF FROM TAKING TERRI OUT OF THE HOSPICE. His reason - the DCF did not have sufficient evidence to support their claim for removal.

I believe DCF did - but this judge seems determined to kill this woman and nothing is going to stop him - not even common sense.

Now .. The DCF has done their job - issued the order for removal .. the circuit court has done their job (within the 24 hours required) .. and ruled against removal.

Are you trying to tell me that the Governor has the power to override that court order against DCF - when police were standing there at the hospice ready to enforce the order (and said they would) - and Jeb could just walk in there - with no authority - take over - order the police around - take Terri ..?? Done Deal!!! To believe that was possible is just nuts.

According to FL people - the police were ready to go - but did not go because the DCF told them to stand down - the court had ruled against the order to remove.

The judge wasn't bluffing - he issued a court order.

And .. Jeb didn't fold - Jeb obeyed the court order (why is that looked at as folding?).

[CyberAnt]

Yes - partly. DCF has to file an order to remove with the circuit court - who then have 24 hours to rule for or against the removal. Of course Greer didn't wait to rule against the removal of Terri - therefore - the court order stopped the DCF.

It wasn't to avoid violence - it was to obey the court order - which the police at the Hospice advised they were willing to enforce.

Jeb could not go against the court order and in turn order the DCF to do something illegal. That's just plain nuts.

[michigander]

(why is that looked at as folding?)

It's could'a, would'a, should'a.
Yes, he could'a (which you seem to dispute).
Should'a and would'a will be based on his decision of could'a. But, in the end, those were his decisions to make and the consequences are what he (and no one esle) will have to deal with.

[CyberAnt]

Then people need to get involved in the process and get the laws changed.

GOD gave Adam authority - Gen 1:28 - "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, .. and subdue it: and have dominion .. over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

I don't think MAN has done a very good job of "subdue it" and "have dominion".

[michigander]

esle = else
My bad...

[CyberAnt]

I guess so .. because I see people using laws that have no relevance to the court cases and yet they want it to apply to Terri - it's too late.

I'm physically sick over this issue with Terri - and I am dreading her death. I can't explain it - but I still believe with all my heart that the Bush brothers did all the law would allow them to do to help her. It's sad, really.

[Nick Danger]

I'm going to start from square one.

Then start with the law, and the facts. There is an "emergency" provision in the law that allows the DCF to act without a court order if it believes that a disabled person is in imminent danger of harm. This was the provision that the DCF intended to act under.

Under that provision, the DCF could have seized Terri and gotten her into a hospital. Having done that, they would have 24 hours to notify a court of what they had done, and to petition for continued custody of Terri. Weekends and holidays do not count toward the 24 hours. So had they seized her any time after midnight Friday, they would not have to notify a court until Monday.

Once the court is notified, it must schedule a hearing. Parties wishing to appear at the hearing must be given 24 hours notice. So the hearing can't happen before Tuesday.

They would have had almost four days to bring Terri back to whatever state they could, and get a PET scan (which is not an MRI scan, for all you magnetism fans) in an effort to prove that she has higher-brain activity. Had a PET scan shown activity in the cerebral cortex, all the doctors would have stepped back from the "vegetative state" diagnosis, and the talking heads on TV would have been going, "Whoa!"

As to the facts: the DCF did not petition Greer for permission to enter the facility to take Terry. They petitioned for legal custody, a subtly different thing under a different law. The order that Greer issued forbidding the DCF to act under the "imminent harm" law was issued in response to a filing by Felos, who heard Jeb on the TV saying he was going to send in the DCF under the "emergency" provisions. Felos rushed to court and got an order forbidding that... an order that is likely to be found highly illegal if ever reviewed.

[michigander]

the Bush brothers did all the law would allow them to do to help her.

George, yes, as the feds decided this to be an issue that should be decided by the states (since it wasn't going to cost the feds any money by withholding services) in 1997.
Should Jeb provoke a state's constitutional, separation of powers conflict regarding this?
That is his decision to make.

[carl in alaska]

"That was a poker-game-power-play, not a threat by deputies to shoot state policemen. Had the mission arrived with "compelling force," it would have been the deputies who backed down.

I doubt it. Instead, the deputies would have drawn their guns and said "you're not entering this building." It only takes a few men to block a doorway. Then you have an armed confrontation in which more people could end up dead.

[EternalVigilance]

And yes...just so long as you get due process.

How could someone who has never had their own attorney have 'due process'??

How could a person who has never been charged with a capital crime be executed by the State of Florida, when Article One, Section Two is CLEAR that they can't??

How can you live with yourself when you keep misusing what 'due process' means, preying on the ignorance of the public to deceive them into believing that somehow it is okay to kill one of our weakest citizens just because some pissant probate judge rules it must be so??

Since when does a probate judge have the power of life and death, and the power to negate our constitutions??

Most of the defenders of this inaction choose to simply ignore Section Two as well as the Fifth Amendment it echoes. You simply choose to misuse terms.

If you follow your argument to its core, you're arguing that the State has a right to kill citizens that have never committed a crime, if some judge says its okay.

But nothing could be further from the truth.

Y'all are helping commit a crime against humanity, against our most fundamental principle as a nation, and against all human decency..

[EternalVigilance]

I've been there for a week.

The chances of an armed standoff are ZERO.

You and those propagating this are full of it.

Notwithstanding that, even if you were right, and it would be ludicrous to think so, that would be even worse for the Governor. It would just add to the list of tinpot dictators he's groveling to....

[carl in alaska]

"The chances of an armed standoff are ZERO."

Now how could you possibly know that? What do you think the deputies are going to do, just say "OK Mr. State Policeman, I'm going to disobey my orders and let you walk in here." They may or may not have drawn guns, but they're not going to just move out of the way. At the very least it would end up in a shoving match between two armed police forces.

[CyberAnt]

"please find for me in either the United States or the Florida State Constitution the specific article that designates a court order from a state circuit judge as a "law"."

And .. since you were quoting a statement I made in #209 - I did not say "a court order from a state circuit judge is law".

A court order is a court order - when you have a police agency ready and willing to enforce it.

But .. since the Governor put his hand on a Bible and SWORE TO UPHOLD THE "LAW" - then please tell me what statute is there which says Jeb DOESN'T HAVE TO OBEY THE "LAW".

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Now how could you possibly know that?

Good question.