[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

Sherwood Boehlert? Ugh - a world class RINO - like Chris Shays!

Maybe so, but in this case I believe he is correct. Let me ask you as I requested in my post: If you believe Congress was correct in bypassing SCOTUS, how do you justify that? I am assuming that you are a conservative who believes in states' rights and separation of powers.

If so, and if you believe the tube should be put back in by order of a new law from Congress, how do you justify that huge clash between believing that and at the same time believeing is states' rights and the separation of the three branches?

[goldstategop]

I justify that by observing the Constitution empowers Congress to protect the rights of American citizens. That's a delegated power whereas there's no power to create an expensive entitlement program. The Constitution lists among our rights - life, liberty and the acquisition of property. None of the rights we have mean a great deal if the right to life isn't ensured. When a state violates the rights of American citizens, the federal government has a duty to step in to correct it. We Republicans wrote the 14th Amendment towards that end. We do believe states have rights but they are not and have never been absolute. And the judiciary was meant to serve us; it was never meant to be our dark and fearful master.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[walden]

Convicted murderers under a sentence of death have a right to appeal that sentence to federal court. Unfortunately, Terry Schiavo is innocent of any crime and her death sentence was handed down by a civil court judge, so she has no such right of appeal.

Doesn't anything about this sound wrong to you? A death sentence handed down to an unarguably innocent person doesn't bother you at all?