Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tom DeLay on Special Report Discussing Judiciary-6 PM ET
FoxNews | 3-31-2005

Posted on 03/31/2005 3:05:08 PM PST by kingattax

Rep. Tom DeLay is appearing on Special Report with Brit Hume to discuss the activist judiciary and the recently passed federal law calling for a de novo review of the Terri Schindler Schiavo case.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: allterriallthetime; anotherterrithread; enoughalready; morethebetter; schiavorepublic; terri; yeskeepthemcoming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last
To: Diva Betsy Ross
You may listen to him all you want, but you simply don't understand the constitutional system then. No legislature can write all the details of what it expects in to ANY law. NEVER. It's impossible. There will always be individuals who apply judgment as to whether the specifics of a case fit or do not, whether the evidence is substantial, or not.

I'm not trying to be snotty here, but what are the people on these threads who have literally gone bonkers going to do when they find out that Scalia and Thomas joined the seven others in ruling that the USSC had no right to hear the case? Claim they, too, are "out of control?"

21 posted on 03/31/2005 4:13:52 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunkport

This issue is bigger than Terri Schiavo....

Yes it is. It's about states rights and keeping the Federal Government out of state business.


22 posted on 03/31/2005 4:22:03 PM PST by csmusaret (Urban Sprawl is an oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: antceecee
Delay is not going to get run out of office. That would have to be done by the House, and it will not do that---which is the flip side of "runaway judges,"---that they do not have any more power over the legislature than the legislature has over them.

The founding principle of the Constitutional court system is that NO LEGISLATURE can write enough detail into ANY law that it does not need to be applied on a case-by-case basis. What all this uproar is going to do is to force state legislatures to write even more detail into laws, and IMHO, in "right to die" legislation, you are NOT going to like the results if the polls are any indicator.

23 posted on 03/31/2005 4:23:55 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LS

MSM is hot on his tail of so called ethics problems. I won't be surprised to see them bring him down. If his fellow Republicans decide they might be risking their own political futures by protecting him they will leave him to the wolves. That is the nature of politics today. So, no matter that the House will not support it in the present, does not mean they will not in the future (they at times have an every man for himself attitude). The actions of the circuit court judge Greer in this issue should be scrutinized, especially in light of the Congressional subpoena that was issued and quashed. I know you are the very learned prof. of history, but we are dealing with more than just the separation of powers here. We are dealing with a powerful media that has the ability to bring down the mightiest in power. JMHO


24 posted on 03/31/2005 4:43:27 PM PST by antceecee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LS

PS: the polls are slanted....


25 posted on 03/31/2005 4:44:25 PM PST by antceecee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: csmusaret
It's about states rights and keeping the Federal Government out of state business.

I suppose it was "all about states rights" too when the Supreme Ct. decided Brown v. Board of Education, or when Congress passed the Civil Rights Acts in the early '60s. Sorry, the "states rights" argument was rendered null and void when states fail to grant individuals basic human rights.

26 posted on 03/31/2005 4:50:24 PM PST by Kenny Bunkport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunkport

Tom Delay pooped his pants when the Us Supreme Court told Texas they couldn't outlaw sodomy. Conservatives everywhere complained that federal courts had no right to stick their nose in state business. Those same Conservatives now want the US Congress to overrule state courts? Give me a break. Floridians need to work on their laws. Congress doesn't need to tell their judges how to rule.


27 posted on 03/31/2005 5:00:56 PM PST by csmusaret (Urban Sprawl is an oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: csmusaret

Did you even read the law passed by Congress in this case? If you didn't, go read it, and then come back here and tell me it was a horrible expansion of federal control over state law.


28 posted on 03/31/2005 5:11:24 PM PST by Kenny Bunkport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunkport

Going to be an interesting decade, that's for sure.


29 posted on 03/31/2005 5:12:45 PM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunkport
This is a good sign. Delay isn't going to walk away from this issue.

Yep, we need a wartime consigliere ...

30 posted on 03/31/2005 5:14:53 PM PST by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: antceecee
I know the media is out to get him. But they have been for years. The media can't do squat about his "ethics problems" if a) he didn't do anything, and b) he tells them to go to hell. (Trent Lott did NOT have to leave. He allowed himself to be steamrolled).

Now, I'll be honest. I have not kept up with the specifics of Delay's ethics problems, but the House can't kick him out (and won't), so he is safe as long as the people in his distric re-elect him.

All Greer did was to interpret the Congressional mandate for a "de novo" hearing as a "new" hearing, which he gave them. Trust me, you do NOT want the U.S. congress spelling out in minute detail what a single judge must do. Moreover, as I've pointed out, this was a non-starter from the get-go: even if Greer had given Congress what it wanted, a "bottoms up" brand-new hearing it would have looked like this: the Schindlers would have brought in two neurologists who said Terri is fine; Schaivo would have brought in two who said she is PVS; and Greer, as the tie-breaker, would have appointed a fifth neurologist who conformed to his earlier decision, and that would be that. I'm amazed that anyone here thought ANY "de novo" hearing would have any different result. The judge always sets the definitions.

So then what? Are you really going to allow Congress to say, "You must not only have a de novo hearing, but must use neurologists x, y, z?" Then, after the hearing starts, say one dies---and the judge has to appoint another one! The point is NO LEGISLATURE can get involved in this minutia---it is totally destructive of the entire system.

31 posted on 03/31/2005 6:24:26 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: antceecee
1) I don't think the polls are slanted much. But even if they are some, there is an overwhelming sentiment out there on this case, and if you tailor new legislation, you'll be surprised how far away it is from what you want---then you're going to have to live with it . . . or die with it.

2) All the people I talk to---including MANY fundamentalist Christians---are on the other side of this, and they KNOW the issues. They aren't fooled.

We as conservatives, above all, should know that the public generally knows the score. They knew it in the 2004 election, and they knew it in this case. It's a very bad habit to think that the "peeps" are stupid just because they don't agree with you.

32 posted on 03/31/2005 6:27:18 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Yep, we need a wartime consigliere ...

Any volunteers?...Anyone at all....?

33 posted on 03/31/2005 8:41:15 PM PST by Kenny Bunkport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LS

True about Trent Lott. I hope that DeLay hangs tough.
Regarding 'de novo' hearing I would have hoped that the issue of guardianship of Michael should have been reviewed. He had definite conflict of interest in having moved on with another woman, having children etc...
Terri did not have a guardian with her best interest at heart. Through all of the legalese there has to be some common sense in the law or we are all doomed to live with the ridiculous whims of any crazy judge out there. Judges are not infallible and there has to be a check on them. The government of the people is by the people, not by the judiciary.
(thanks for your thoughtful responses).


34 posted on 04/01/2005 10:44:58 AM PST by antceecee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson