Posted on 04/09/2005 4:58:13 PM PDT by tutstar
In all my years dealing with constitutional law, I have always said no to judicial impeachment even when from time to time on various issues some conservative activists have argued for it in specific situations. I can generally provide people more arguments against impeachment than for it where judges are concerned. Sometimes I cannot provide arguments for impeachment at all, because all the valid arguments from my point of view mitigated against judicial impeachment in those situations.
The Schiavo matter is dramatically different. Not only am I convinced that judicial impeachment applies here, I am convinced that it applies to every federal judge in the chain from the district court judge who first received the case under the act signed by President Bush, through the appeals judges of the 11th Circuit, to all nine sitting members of the U.S. Supreme Court, with the exception of the one or two judges that bucked the system.
This is the first time in my several decades of dealing with constitutional law that such a situation exists. I never imagined that I would see this situation in my entire lifetime or in my professional career.
The key points are summarized here. They are based on two one-hour radio talkshow interviews I did locally this week which laid out the matter in some detail.
First, Article III uses the words "good behavior" as the term of art dealing with the impeachment of federal judges. The Constitution uses the words "high crimes and misdemeanors" as the standard of impeachment for the executive and legislative branches. "High crimes and misdemeanors" is a higher and more rigid standard than "good behavior" in Article III. In the Schiavo matter, the misconduct on the part of the federal judiciary violates both standards. It violates the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard because by refusing to protect the substantive right to life of Ms. Schiavo under the 14th Amendment, and treating the matter as strictly procedural, the various judges made themselves accessories to murder. It violates the "good behavior" standard for the sorts of reasons explained by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England.
The federal courts obstinately refused in the Schiavo matter to employ a jurisprudence of constitutionally protected inalienable rights mandated by the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, the rights model of original American jurisprudence from the era of the Founders, and as extended to state misconduct by the 14th Amendment.
The federal courts refused to judicially notice that we prosecuted people for war crimes at Nuremberg for the very sorts of actions taken and required by the Florida state courts in clear violation of the original meaning of inalienable rights and due process of law.
Under our federal union, there has never been a power in any state to execute anyone not convicted of a crime and who has not been indicted and/or tried criminally. Under our federal union and under the constitutions and bills of rights of every individual state, the right to life is inalienable. At the state level, that right can only be lost by an individual person through an act of wrongdoing constituting a forfeiture and adjudicated as such through a criminal trial where due process would apply. Executing an innocent person through a civil process is ultra vires by definition and has been ultra vires for over two hundred years of American experience. Having occurred in the Schiavo matter, the question is not one of due process because there can be no such process, period. Where such occurs, as it has here, it is an act of state tyranny by definition, the ground upon which we fired the king of England.
When people say Ms. Schiavo received due process that is not true because the state is not permitted to have such a process, period. For any state to have a process that executes a person or citizen unconvicted of a crime is not a matter of due process because there can be no such process. The 14th Amendment mandates that the right to life be protected by the federal government if a state materially fails in its duty to secure the inalienable right to life. For any federal judge to fail in that 14th Amendment duty is "bad behavior" and criminal negligence. When the federal courts treated the matter pro forma as a procedural one rather than one of substantive rights, the courts materially breached their duty to a person who is also a citizen of the United States under the 14th Amendment with both personhood and citizenship rights. In light of the fact that the federal judges' malfeasance has materially redefined (by inaction) something as fundamental to all persons and American citizens as the right to life, and demonstrated by precedent that the federal courts criminally disregard their duty to uphold the right to life, they have failed to maintain the standard of good conduct required of a federal judge and forfeited the respect and obedience of the American people.
For these and related reasons, every federal judge involved in the execution of Terri Schiavo has violated his/her office as judge and has committed the high crime of being an accessory to murder. Therefore every judge so tainted MUST be impeached by Congress and removed from the bench.
Impeachment is a nice way of the legislature to slap the hands of those elected or appointed officials who screw up. The end result, if they are convicted, is that they are reprimanded or removed from office.
What the judges did in the Terri Schiavo case, as indicated at the end of the article, was that they were accessories to murder. Except for Judge Greer, that is. Judge Greer not only solicited a murder but he ordered it!!! His order of Feb 25, 2005 stated:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that absent a stay from the appellate courts, the guardian, Michael Schiavo, shall (Note he didn't say 'may', or 'can', but SHALL) cause the removal of nutrition and hydration from the ward, Theresa Schiavo, at 1 p.m. on Friday, March 18, 2005.
Note also that Greer's order said nothing about feeding tubes! She was ordered to death regardless of whether she could eat on her own or not. Law enforcement even arrested those who tried to bring food and drink to her during the execution.
No, impeachment is not the answer for these sinister SOB's. They need to join Scotty Peterson since what they did is no better or worse than what he did......
Question: How differently would Judge Greer have been treated if he went into Terri's room at 2:50p.m. on Feb 25, 2005 and put a gun to her head and shot her dead considering that when he used his pen at that exact minute he accomplished the same end???????
Marking for later read.
Is that what your crystal ball is telling you ..??
I'm in favor of civil disobedience, but impeachment is not the same thing. It's a lot of wasted effort. I think the protests at the hostice were useful, especially those protesters who got themselves arrested trying to bring Terri water. The legislature is not going to impeach. Or to put it another way, who's going to impeach them? Afterall, they let this happen too.
"I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the media to help"
Nobody on this forum is stupid enough to expect that.
But .. since when do we need to have the media on our side to get things done ..??
IIRC he already ruled to seal the files.
You were expecting something different ..??
Excuse me .. we don't care what the FL legislature did or didn't do - it's now in the hands of CONGRESS - and I believe Tom DeLay is going to really shake up the place .. if not .. why else would the dems collude to attack him.
They believe they can totally discredit him and keep the public from siding with him regarding the judges.
It will not work .. we are with Tom because he understands that Congress has the authority to bring impeachment charges .. and I believe Tom will!
Good grief - please don't try to walk and chew gum at the same time .. I doubt you'll make it across the road.
There is an article here on FR - search for "DCF" - in all caps - or "Greer" and you should find it.
Green already sealed the files.
DeLay might be able to bring impeachment charges against the federal judges, but since Congress also voted to pass a meaningless law that was obviously unconstitutional, I interpret their actions as siding with the judges as well. DeLay can't impeach by himself.
If you want to do something about this, it's going to have to start at the grass roots. It's going to have to start with protesters engaging in civil disobedience.
Wonderfully written and very logical. The simple truth that has been obscured by all of these "rights" is the fact that this "right to die" (which certainly does not necessarily include terminal cases and a person's wish to avoid extraordinary and futile means of life sustenance) is unnatural. Natural law is the foundation for all law that concerns these bandied about terms and "social mores" concerning life at all stages.
.
We heard news reports during the Kiling of our Little TERRI that friend of MICHAEL Judge GREER had sealed all the court documents in this case.
This week's news reports stated that Judge GREER was forcing Florida's family services dept to turn over its TERRI SCHIAVO Case files to him this week that may hold MICHAEL's past abuse of TERRI. With the Judge rulling to seal them or not while in his possession to come yesterday.
Is this what you are referring to when you say Judge GREER had already ruled on this?
.
Hi floriduh - I feel as bad as you do about Terri. I had a sick feeling for a week.
"Has anyone heard how MICHAEL SCIAVO's buddy Judge GREER ruled yesterday on whether or not to permanently seal the State's records he acqured this week that
point to MICHAEL's abuse of TERRI..?"
I haven't even heard about this. Do you have a link?
Thanks.
so often there is only one candidate. what countries does that remind you of? we're going to have to have a revolution of some kind. i fear it is inevitable now. the status quo ante is unsustainable.
dated in 2000 and stated a life expectancy of less than six months, yet she lived for five years before they killed her. That hospice should be very, very liable for wrongful death. Or would Greedier handle that suit too?
And if not, then the Constitution takes yet another nail in its coffin. James Madison insisted that this country, in order for it to succeed as the founding fathers set up, would need to have a majority of morally principled people or it would not be viable or tenable.
I believe that that change in critical mass is very close to swinging over if it already has not.
I'll go with that.
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.