For criminal cases. This wansn't one.
. IT IS A FEDERAL ISSUE.
It was a state issue under state laws concerning incapacitated persons. It couldn't even be reviewed by the federal courts until Congress gave them a special one-time jurisdiction.
Terri's life was suppose to be protected by the FEDERAL CONSTIUTION.
Terri was supposed to be protected under state law. The legislators in florida refused to modify state law in order to save her.
That you and your friends in the pr-death movement were able to see that she wasn't given a review of her due process is no reason to be angry.
This case went all the way through the Florida court system several times. It was given a quite unprecedented level of review even before it hit the federal courts.
I would think your side would be elated.
My side was on keeping her from dehydrating. My side was also on not destroying our republic to do it.
That's completely wrong. In fact, the 14th amendment - WHICH WAS RATIFIED BY THE STATES - requires due process in ANY government action, not just criminal cases. I can appreciate your passion on this, but you're completely wrong in these statements.
No it wasn't. It was never given a de novo review, which means a full review of both the facts and the laws that were applied. Again, you have your facts wrong.
Your lot seems to be cast with the culture of death. I say this republic will only thrive if we all seek to promote life.
Where does it say due process is only for criminal cases or even that differing standards of due process are allowed? If differing standards are allowed, why should there be any due process at all? We could just flip a coin to make the decision.