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.
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).