 Cynthia Tucker |
Posted on 04/03/2005 6:42:45 PM PDT by Gondring
Friends of Florida judge George Greer describe him as a low-key conservative Christian, a Republican, a family man, a dog lover. Appellate courts have found over and over again that Greer simply followed the law in deciding a sad and controversial case. But for that sin, the Pinellas County Circuit Court judge was invited out of his Southern Baptist Church.
|
|
Apparently, Greer's critics, including his pastor, didn't like his rulings in the Terri Schiavo case, which landed in his courtroom in 1998. They wanted him to be an activist judge -- a jurist who ignored the law and ruled according to the passions of a group of partisans.
Ultraconservatives want you to believe the term "activist judge" applies to a group of determined liberals whose rulings have overturned historic precedent, undermined morality and defied common sense. But the controversy that erupted around Schiavo, who died on Thursday, ought to remind us once and for all what "activist judge" really means: a jurist whose rulings dissatisfy a right-wing political constituency.
Over the next few months, you'll hear the term "activist judge" often as President Bush nominates justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The president could end up appointing as many as four. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, is ailing with cancer; John Paul Stevens is also an octogenarian. Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are cancer survivors in their 70s.
With so many likely vacancies, ultraconservatives see an opportunity to drive from the bench any semblance of fealty to the law or the U.S. Constitution. They claim that judges have become the tool of an outlandish liberal fringe that has violated the graves of the Founding Fathers. When right-wing talk-show hosts and U.S. senators denounce judicial activism, they conjure up images of jurists who terrorize the God-fearing, coddle criminals and would -- according to one crazed campaign memo passed around during last year's presidential campaign -- outlaw the Bible.
The next time you hear those claims, think of Judge Greer, whose politics tilt to the right. He is among the targets of ultraconservative ire.
For that matter, think of the current Supreme Court -- hardly a bastion of liberalism. Its justices declined to intervene in the Schiavo case because they could find no legitimate reason to do so.
While the rift between Michael Schiavo and his in-laws, Bob and Mary Schindler, is depressing, family conflict is almost a way of life in America. Courts are called upon often to settle family disputes over money, children and property. Florida law makes clear that a spouse has the right to decide end-of-life issues, and, after testimony from several people, Greer upheld Schiavo's claim that his wife didn't want to be kept alive through artificial means.
It is perfectly understandable that the Schindlers were unhappy with his ruling. As grieving parents, they wanted to believe, contrary to the judgment of several physicians, that their daughter might one day be miraculously restored.
But the attacks on the judiciary by the Schindlers' supporters -- including an attempted end-run by an activist Congress -- made it clear that a minority of religious extremists have no respect for the law and no understanding of the separation of powers on which this government was founded.
Among those who missed their high school civics class, apparently, were Congress and the president. In one of many rulings turning down the Schindlers' request for intervention, an Atlanta federal court judge chastised the executive and legislative branches for overreaching.
"Congress chose to overstep constitutional boundaries into the province of the judiciary. Such an act cannot be countenanced," wrote Judge Stanley Birch, who was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush. Hardly a liberal activist.
The current President Bush has already made clear that his idea of a model chief justice is Clarence Thomas, who has no respect for judicial precedent. But even Thomas might not satisfy the extremists who chastise Judge Greer. They will be satisfied with nothing less than a judiciary steeped in the same narrow religious views they want to impose on the nation.
Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. She can be reached by e-mail: cynthia@ajc.com.
| why we should want Terri Schiavo to endure an existence that 98% of us would refuse for ourselves?
"I'm a quadriplegic, been that way for 28 years. I would hate for somebody else to decide my life is not worth living."Secondly, I have endured an existence that at one time I probably dismissed as, "If that ever happens to me, I hope somebody shoots me." Let's just say that when it happens, it's your new reality, and it beats being dead. It's amazing, the deprivations you can endure if you have to. The thing that drew me into this case is that there are so many conflicting stories as to the state of the late Mrs. Schiavo. If we assume away her humanity, and leave there an animal body breathing and beating its heart, with no human consciousness inside, I have less trouble with this. But I don't believe the people running this show took all the steps they could to make sure that was the case before they killed her. Early on, when Michael really was still devoted to her, she was apparently re-learning to walk with those bars they have. Numerous people have testified that she has said simple things like, "Stop!" and "Help me." Then Michael got his million bucks, and the therapy stopped and the staff was ordered not to do anything for her. That included no MRI and no PET scan, either of which would have gone a long way toward erasing these doubts as to whether there was anyone home in there. That a court would order her death without those tests is astounding in this day and age. It's not like the doctors were unanimous on this; they weren't. There was doubt. Yet some county probate judge decided to believe these doctors instead of those doctors, and ordered a human being killed without any definitive tests. You don't know, and nobody knows, how far she might have gotten with proper treatment and therapy. She was making progress when it was all halted. Let's say at the best case, she would gotten to be the female version of Forrest Gump. Does that justify killing somebody? Did you ever see the TV movie Charly, based on Flowers for Algernon? Charly is actually happier at the end, however sad the rest of us were. |
Who were the "reliable witnesses?" Michael, his brother and wife.
The brother said he heard her say it at her grandmothers funeral. Later on FOX when Terri was almost dead, he said they discussed it in the privacy of their own home. He has two conflicting stories. Which one was it? Or was he perjuring himself in front of the whole world?
Terri's closest friends say the contrary. The judge of death threw out all the pro-Terri testimony, and kept only the pro- death testimony. Of course, Greer's wife sits on the Hospice board.
I wonder if Hospice will be receiving a large donation form Michael for "being so kind" after he collects another big sack of cash from Terri's life insurance policy he bought from his new skanky girlfriend!
Terri told her husband she would not want to live indefinitely in a PVS. I believe him. The court believed him. Most of the world believs him. You live in a dream world.
Why not go on and point out why these "nurses" were not considered credible? How about showing how Mrs. Schiavo's condition had deteriorated, as is common when the cortex is breaking down and becoming liquid? How about discussing the changed testimony?
I agree. For every day that TS held on more and more people were exposed to her plight and depending on what outlet they sought they could gain insight or support for their position. But the one absolute was that this issue touched more Americans than abortion ever could because we all could face a future like hers; whether in old age or not.
I agree with Nick, never underestimate the intelligence of the American people. And I'm confident that this case will strengthen pro-life Americans of every stripe with an added benefit for conservatives.
Now if Libertarians For Life would update their site I could include us pro-life libertarians.
Which religion am I fanatical about again?
Now that's funny. Look up.
Karen Quinlan died in 1985. Terry Schiavo was 22 when Quinlan died. There very well might have been a conversation between Terry and her mother about the Quinlan case when Terry was between 17 and 20 years of age, that is, between 1980 and 1983. Your assertion that the age/timing based on the Quinlan case proves Mrs. Schindler to be a liar is not warranted on this basis alone. Is there something else that causes you to assert that Mrs. Schindler is a liar?
I heard the tapes of her voice, saw the video footage, listened to the doctors, listen to the clergy and nurses and friends and family who said they could communicate with her.
IF she were flat lined she would not be able to swallow, breath and most likely would have chocked upon her own saliva at some point-not the case here at all since she lived for 5 years with a feeding tube, with out having to be cleared. She was in such good shape that she wasn't on life support.
The fact is her brain scans do not tell what level her functioning was. Humans are mysterious that way.
Okay, if I look at the Constitution and "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is there, I will admit that the government should be involved in messing in the states' business. If I look and it's not there, will you admit you're wrong and drop your activist push on the Schiavo stuff, and admit that I am a conservative who knows and follows the Constitution? Fair enough?
I have a copy of the Constitution right here on my desk and I haven't opened it up to cheat...I'll not open it til I see your reply.
First of all, the doctors they used as "experts" were hired by Michael , his lawyer, and the judge of death. There were no unbiased doctors allowed to testify.
Because they never tested her brain waves, no one knows what state she was in. The PVS is all propaganda so far.
The autopsy will be able to tell which nerves were alive at the time of death and which were not, but they should have tested her before they murdered her. She could have been completely aware of what was going on around her, but unable to connect to her body without rehabilitation (which was denied her by her loving husband).
The brain works like that of a hologram. When one part of the brain is damaged, other parts of the brain have been known to take over. Granted, she was severely disabled, but no one knew her condition beyond that.
Well, I don't believe people should be starved to death.
If you consider that "any cost."
A very reasoned post, except that it misrepresents what happened in this case.
The laws and decisions have been around for a while, and I think there has been plenty of daylight on them...in fact, the Federal court that came in at the request of Schindlers pointed out that this has had MORE than the usual amount of Constitutional due process.
Her rights were respected and the decision was proper.
BTW, she wasn't terminally ill by some definitions.
I agree. Far more civilized methods should be available for a peaceful end.
I will repeat it to give them one more chance:
Does the government (state or federal) have the authority, determined by conditions set by the legislature or the court, to order food and water to be withheld from a person, even orally (because that is EXACTLY what Greer ordered. He didn't say maybe, if you decide, if she indicates, etc.; he said SHALL NOT be provided)? If the government has this authority, then what prevents them from setting, through legislation or court action, the conditions under which you can withhold food or water to someone who is not PVS? And how are affirmative answers to the preceding two questions not a massive increase in government control over human life?
OfF, could you ping the list to this informative post? It clears up the confusion some people have over the rule of law being abandoned in the process of murdering Terri. Some people actually believe that there was nothing illegal about the many laws that were broken, and that preventing Terri's murder would have been illegal.
BTW- Nope I won't drop it. So what next.
So you say that the New England Journal of Medicine was lying when they described her EEGs as flat?
Or are you just getting your information from the Schindler lie squad?
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.
Let me first quote you Michael Donnelly: