Cheney Opposes Retribution Against Schiavo Judges

Washington Post ^ | April 4, 2005 | Mike Allen & Brian Faler

[tessalu]

Vice President Cheney says he opposes revenge against judges for their refusal to prolong the life of the late Terri Schiavo, although he did not criticize House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) for declaring that they will "answer for their behavior."

Cheney was asked about the issue on Friday by the editorial board of the New York Post. He said twice that he had not seen DeLay's remarks, but the vice president said he would "have problems" with the idea of retribution against the courts. "I don't think that's appropriate," he said. "I may disagree with decisions made by judges in any one particular case. But I don't think there would be much support for the proposition that because a judge hands down a decision we don't like, that somehow we ought to go out -- there's a reason why judges get lifetime appointments."

[deport]

The law said there has to be a written advance directive

---

Really.... doesn't the law also provide for the following:

PART IV

ABSENCE OF ADVANCE DIRECTIVE

765.401 The proxy.

765.404 Persistent vegetative state.

[Wolfstar]

I have a problem with the whole crazed spectacle that became the Schiavo case. As for the courts, the main problem I have with them is that they kept agreeing to re-hear the case over and over and over again.

[antiRepublicrat]

WRONG AGAIN. The law said SHALL. not may, not could, not if, but SHALL.

You referenced it, now read it. It says "A guardian may be removed for any of the following reasons..."

[nicmarlo]

How come he gets to decide to ignore some laws?

courtesy of PhilDragoo, I present you with:

judge because i say so

[antiRepublicrat]

So you've found it. Good. Now let's read it.

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida SHALL have jurisdiction

This establishes the judge can hear it, and he did.

the District Court SHALL determine de novo any claim of a violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo within the scope of this Act

Notice that this DOES NOT direct the federal judge to try the entire case from the beginning, just rule on claims of rights violations without considering prior judgements on whether there were any rights violations. The Schindlers brought IIRC four claims of rights violations, all of which were reviewed de novo, all of which were rejected.

The District Court SHALL entertain and determine the suit without any delay or abstention in favor of State court proceedings,

And the judge did, likely stayed up all night doing it.

So, where did the federal judge violate anything?

[TheeOhioInfidel]

Everyone must come to terms with the reality that the Bush admin. is a traitor to true conservatism. The truth is plain and simple. Cheney's comments do not surprise me one bit. Funny how this admin. has turned its back on so many who helped get it into office.

[nicmarlo]

It's not "let's read." It's "YOU read." The federal courts did NOT review DE NOVO. Quit spinning and do some reading. tutstar and I have already provided you with plenty; you've more than shown yourself ignorant to the facts. And it now appears you prefer being willfully ignorant and defending murderers and lawbreakers.

[ClancyJ]

Are you saying Terri's constitutional rights were met?

Just how were they met?

Remember, they imposed death on her.

[johnb838]

Well, this sort of pales in comparison to the Sudan.

[maine-iac7]

Under Florida law, his ruling in that case was correct. Judges don't, nor should they, give out restraining orders like they're going out of style.

tell that to the wife who asked for the restraining order because her husband said he was going to kill her.

Oops - pardon me. You can't tell her anything. He shot her.

But at least Greer was 'following the law"

[Wolfstar]

Are you saying Terri's constitutional rights were met? Just how were they met? Remember, they imposed death on her.

Well, since you gave yourself the only answer that matters to you, there's no point to further discussion.

[antiRepublicrat]

Everyone must come to terms with the reality that the Bush admin. is a traitor to true conservatism.

I'll agree to that on a lot of grounds, but not this one. The federal courts acted impeccably on this one, returning rulings directly in line with the law and precedent. They showed judicial restraint you don't see much in these publicized cases.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

I don't want revenge. I want justice. I am not talking about all judges. I am talking about Greer.

If VP Cheney disagrees with me- I will disagree with him.

That's ok- that is how America works.

[Modernman]

But at least Greer was 'following the law"

Every time a liberal judge substitutes his judgment for the law, Freepers get in an uproar, and rightfully so.

When conservative Republican Baptist Judge Greer follows the letter of the law, rather than ruling in an activist manner, many Freepers called him a Nazi.

Hypocrisy seems to cross all political lines.

[SedVictaCatoni]

Just WHO wrote the Florida statutes? Was it the legislature? Or was it a designated end-of-life panel whom the legislature allowed to make law as they saw fit. To me, it would seem this would be illegal as they are not elected and the laws were made without a legislative vote.

Who wrote the statute is not as important as who passed the statute. Regardless of whether the law was recommended or drafted by a group of nonlegislators (as many bills are), it was within the Florida legislature's power to pass it, and they did so in the ordinary and valid manner.