Appeals court declines new Schiavo review

MSNBC ^ | March 30, 2005

[Sola Veritas]

The Associated Press Updated: 3:33 p.m. ET March 30, 2005ATLANTA - Just a few hours after allowing Terri Schiavo's parents to file a request for a new hearing, a federal appeals court on Wednesday declined to reopen the case.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta did not elaborate in its brief statement.

It had issued a written order late Tuesday allowing Bob and Mary Schindler to file the appeal, even though the court had set a March 26 deadline for doing so.

The same court last week twice ruled against the Schindlers, who are trying to keep their daughter alive.

In requesting a new hearing, the Schindlers argued that a federal judge in Tampa should have considered the entire state court record and not just the procedural history when he ruled against the parents.

[Sola Veritas]

What kind of sick mind game is the 11th U.S. Circuit Court playing? They "allow" them to file a request only to immediately deny it. This is perverse.

[tomahawk]

Her blood is on their hands.

[mlc9852]

They knew exactly how they would rule. I am so disgusted with the entire judiciary, from probate up to the SC. Who do these people think they are?

[tallhappy]

Weird psycho stuff.

They'll agree to re-open the case 1 minute after she dies.

[Redgirl]

They have to at least APPEAR like they're being impartial...

[Honestfreedom]

Yes they should realize how psychologically cruel this is. They are bas-ards.

[drt1]

These imperious Bastards! What a joke the judiciary is - Unfortunately, very few are laughing. This deserves serious action to rid us of these overlords.

[GrandEagle]

Of course...Hubbie is only a few days from being $700,000 richer.

[Edgerunner]

This will only infuriate us more! Why raise hope then dash it to the ground again and again? Is their some perverse pleasure these heartless bastards get from doing this? The judiciary has lost their sense of JUSTICE. Law without MERCY and JUSTICE is tyranny.

[lugsoul]

Yep. We just can't have these Courts following their own procedure or anything like that...

[spokeshave]

Sounds like something from Stalin's Gulag

[jbloedow]

The American people, at least those who think clearly, are going to have to decide what they are going to do about the out-of-control judiciary. There appears to be no clear Constitutional means to restore the rule of law and to stop this ever-increasing judicial tyranny.

If Americans continue to let this occur, it will get as bad and even worse than in my country Canada, where few question the rights of judges to write, annul, and amend the law as they see fit, without boundaries, review, let alone authority. This includes the Constitution itself, such as it is. There is no question in Canada that judges have the right to take the law into their own hands.

This may require massive demonstrations of civil disobedience, occupation of judicial buildings, who knows? If you think that's too extreme, what else is on offer? It will only get worse left as it is. They are devoid of shame.

I guess the plan right now is to make sure conservatives like Bush get elected, and that the Senate gets increasingly conservative and courageous, and so the benches get repopulated by rule-of-law types, but one lost election and we're set back a long time. Is that our only plan?

[NJ_gent]

The request was denied because it didn't meet the court's requirements for reopening the case. The request amounted to "we disagree with that guy's opinion and you should too". Courts don't work like that, and I'm surprised there weren't 10 lawyers standing there telling them it wouldn't work like that. Judges don't rule by their hearts' desires. They adhere to guidlines and laws. If you walk into court expecting anything else, you're likely going to be quite disappointed.

Judges spend their lives disregarding what they feel and what they want in order to function as they're intended to function within the system. That's why we don't hear about the vast majority of court decisions - they're boring. When do we hear about court decisions? Generally when some judge has an off day (or is just plain 'off' to begin with) and decides to make a fool out of him/herself by ruling from the heart.

[inkling]

Do not disobey your Robed Masters!

[grassboots.org]

This is the video that should be shown on the news everynight - it is even more powerful than the balloon video.

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/ccb/videos/Terri_Big_Eyes.rm

You need Real Player to watch this, available free on the internet.

This is not reflex action - she heard the doctor, she opened her eyes as wide as she could to impress him.

Even Fox news has ignored this clip.

[GrandEagle]

There appears to be no clear Constitutional means to restore the rule of law and to stop this ever-increasing judicial tyranny.
Our Congress has the power to reign in the judicial branch. Through limiting their jurisdiction and/or impeachment.
They REFUSE to do their job - That is our fault. Replacement of elected officials who do not do their job is our responsibility.
It is not too late, but too late is quickly approaching.

Regards,
GE

[atomicpossum]

It appears that, increasingly, higher courts exist to reaffirm decisions from lower ones. If a decision is overturned, it will be on a procedural matter, not on the actual material issues of the case. The judicial system is increasingly incestuous, and the brotherhood of the judiciary far overwhelms the quaint concept of justice. If a lower court wishes to rule erroneously, even arbitrarily, its word becomes immutable law, provided it does not commit a scandalous technical violation (and if they do, it's the plaintiff's responsibility to prove that AND force it down the reviewing court's throat). If a lower court rules arbitrarily, capriciously, even unjustly, you'd better hope they typed the decision on the wrong size paper or another court won't give it the time of day.

The Judicial Fraternity has a doozy of a secret handshake-- if you ain't a member, you ain't (@#*$)@.

[backhoe]

Useless Eaters vs The Death Cult -- 

 

[PhiKapMom]

Thank for stating what should be clear to anyone wanting judges to rule on the law not become activists judges. We may not like the outcome, but they ruled on the law and that is what I want from judges. Anyone advocating less no matter the case, is not acting like a Conservative IMHO because they have let emotions take over.

The pleadings by her attorneys should be required reading for all on here before getting mad at the Federal judges and their rulings. They reminded me of an ambulance chaser trial attorney making a plea to the jury not something I would have expected to be submitted to Federal Court.