Schiavo Appeal Has Been Filed

Fox News

[sonsofliberty2000]

per Fox

[AaronInCarolina]

The purpose of judicial review is to uncover the facts.

The way I have heard it explained regarding the multiple reviews at higher levels is that if Judge Greer stacked the deck against the Schindlers by refusing to allow into the case evidence from the Schindlers, then the only thing that the higher courts can review is ONLY the evidence that Greer DID allow in, which in my view was absolutely one-sided. Since Greer only allowed evidence that was beneficial to Michael Schiavo's argument, given that evidence was the only evidence that the higher courts could review, then it was a slam dunk that higher courts would uphold the lower court ruling. It was explained that the "hearing of the facts" was ONLY done by Greer. Reviews at higher levels DO NOT re-hear all of the facts presented as evidence, only the facts allowed as evidence by the Judge in the lower court. That is what tha FOX News expert explained this morning.

[rowhey]

While the 11th Circuit is known to be fairly conservative...don't be surprised if they fail to intervene in this matter.

This same circuit refused to do anything to prevent Elion Gonzalez from being returned to a Communist dictator.

[Mrs. Shawnlaw]

This is a discussion topic so if you do not want to be involved in it then go away. I for one am proud of freepers who choose not to roll over and pee on themselves by saying 'well, thats that'.

[proud American in Canada]

"The chances of this being successful are pretty near zero."

I agree. I think even if somehow she's successful in Atlanta, the legislation giving the federal court jurisdiction will be declared unconstitutional and we'll go right back to square one.

[katieanna]

I heartily agree that Whittemore should have issued his ruling much sooner because he did seem to indicate from the beginning his reluctance to overturn. Word is Terri's father left the courthouse yesterday down-trodden because even he believed the judge had tipped his hand.

[PhiKapMom]

Someone on here had instructions had to delete your cookies to just keep voting.

[Ohioan from Florida]

Only one judge has determined the 'facts' of this case, and that is Judge Greer in Clearwater. The rest only look to see whether the law was followed. No other court has looked at the 'facts'. NONE!

[MineralMan]

"If I don't hear him comment on Michael for what he is, I say he is a hypocrite."

The Vatican has already stated its objection to withholding nutrition and water from Terri. The Pope? Well, he's pretty ill right now. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any direct word from him. He couldn't even say anything at the Palm Sunday gathering in Rome.

In any case, it would not influence the courts. Yes, he could speak out on this, but it would have no effect here. We are not governed by the Pope in Rome.

[Theodore R.]

You'd better find another boyfriend who shares your values. Or you could later be on Terri's deathbed. The Bible says that a believer should not be "unequally yoked" with a nonbeliever. I didn't make the rule: I just reminded you for your own health and safety.

[ContemptofCourt]

Coming at the story from the angle of being a mother, I can not begin to imagine the nightmare of being legally barred from protecting the life of my child.

Then be sure not to let your child get married and appoint his or her spouse as their health agent.

[Conservative Goddess]

"I hope he rots in hell with that other judge!"

He/she will. The Lord is in control here, and He is using this situation, occuring during Holy Week, to serve His greater purpose. Perhaps this case is meant to show the world how heartless the Dims really are, how devoted they are to the culture of death, and how intellectually dishonest they really are.

I'm ashamed to be part of the legal community. The separation between legality and morality is evident here and it's sickening. But, perhaps, this too, is part of His purpose.

This is also a test for the faithful. We must pray that His will, will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.

[areafiftyone]

I understand. I'm just upset right now and thank you.

[MizSterious]

I'm glad people like you are speaking out. It gives me a better idea who to avoid on Free Republic.

[Victor]

"....no, some of us will never, ever accept this. we will undoubtedly be unable to do anything about it in this particular case, but we will fight this forever and at every possible opportunity. it is just plain wrong....."

Agree. If a million people (or 5 courts) all say the same thing, does that still make it right just because the million said so?

[FR_addict]

She did a great job. Thanks for posting it.

Do you have the list of media contacts? We need to swamp them with Terri information that they have been ignoring like all of the nurses' affidavits, Dr. Cranford's (Doctor Death) background as a hired gun in support of euthanasia, including how his testimony has been proved wrong, and anything else we can think of.

We need to contact TV and Radio. There is a small window of opportunity to get Terri's story out. It looks like they are looking for Terri stories right now.

[goldstategop]

I think so too. When a judge fails to take steps necessary to hear a case, its a signal he thinks it has no merit. And unless the 11th Circuit rules otherwise, basically the Schiavos' suit has been tossed out. Of course that's what passes for justice in America now.

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

[Mo1]

He is certainly ignoring the intent of Congress. It shows that judges are CONFIDENT they can still ARROGANTLY rule as they please.

Though I agree with you that some Judge rule as they arrogantly please

But that is not true about congress

Congress didn't say he had to review this case .. just that he could review it

[keysguy]

Is there any chance any court will review the problem of Michael Schiavo being appointed guardian when he obviously has other objectives than what's best for Terri's welfare.

[Jeff Head]

This latest Federal Judge decision is another in a long line of aborations and corruption assiociated with Terri Shiavo. Where is it written down and notoriized...that her wishes are to die of starvation or thirst if in that position...which would violate her religious beliefs which, by all accounts, she was adamant about?

As to constitutionality of this decision, I say it's pure, unadulterated Bravo Sierra. This Judge could easily have ruled constitutionally that she had a right to life, which trumps all of the other legaleze and mumbo-jumbo being spouted by those who support having her killed.

Common sense has fled so many of our people, even our judges. When there is the least shred of evidence, doubt or disagreement in such a situation as this, particularly amongst direct family members who are willing to lovingly care for her...you ERE ON THE SIDE OF LIFE!

Anything short of this is an abject violation of the most fundamental principles upon which this Republic was founded.

We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are the right to life...

If we as a people cast that aside, if we allow it to be cast aside, then we tread a path that will lead to our ruin, our enslavement and our destruction as a soveriegn Republic and a nation founded upon liberty and the rule of law, that law being undergirded by fundamental moral principle.

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."- John Adams, Oct. 11, 1798"

Sadly, in this ruling and episode, as with many others of our day (ie. abortion) we are living out the negative of John Adams statement...right before our eyes. God bless those who are standing for life, against the culture of death. May we as a people have the fortitude and the willingness, if neccessary, to stand boldly and resoultely on these principles against such conditions of our day.

[Theodore R.]

That's why DeLay should have put on the legislation the disclaimer: "This matter cannot be challenged as to constitutionality by a federal court" or similarly-worded language. That would have been consistent with Article III, Section 2.