Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: housewife101

Okay, someone please clarify about the "ruling." My understanding is that he has only, so far, ruled on a "motion" for injunctive relief and not the actual ruling on the case. Is that correct? If so... he is STILL holding out on making a determination.


486 posted on 03/22/2005 8:13:41 AM PST by Types_with_Fist (I'm on FReep so often that when I read an article at another site I scroll down for the comments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 482 | View Replies ]


To: Types_with_Fist
U.S. District Judge James Whittemore (search) said Bob and Mary Schindler (search) had not established a "substantial likelihood of success" at trial on the merits of their arguments.

Judge Whittemore also found that Schiavo's due process rights had been upheld throughout the litigation process.In the ruling, Whittemore said there were issues concerning the constitutionality of the law Congress passed over the weekend, but he presumed the act to be constitutional for the basis of the request for an injunction that would have ordered the feeding tube reconnected. Whittemore wrote that Schiavo's "life and liberty interests" were protected by the process of the Florida courts. He also found that a state court judge did not compromise the fairness of the proceeding or the impartiality of the court with his decision to allow the feeding tube to be removed. "Even under these difficult and time strained circumstances, however, and notwithstanding Congress' expressed interest in the welfare of Theresa Schiavo, this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it," the ruling reads.

From Fox News

503 posted on 03/22/2005 8:19:20 AM PST by housewife101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 486 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson