Congress Steps In On Schiavo Case
Moves Comes After U.S. Supreme Court Denies Last-Minute Appeal From House Committee
PINELLAS PARK, Fla. -- Congressional leaders said Saturday they reached a compromise that would call on federal courts to decide Terri Schiavo's fate, as emotions swelled outside the hospice where the brain-damaged woman spent her second day without a feeding tube.
With Love,
CtrlAltDel aka Dave
C4/5 Complete - 28 Years Post
Texas, USA
"Tod E. Santee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mark,
Bush has said publicly that he will sign a bill that saves Terrui
Schiavo's life the minute the legislature gets it to his desk.
Congress adjourns at 5pm EST today... but, according to Tom DeLay (just
15 minutes ago) it will be called by the leaders into a Special Session
at 1pm Sunday to discuss and debate this issue. They believe they have
a bill ready that will be acceptable to both houses of Congress, will be
able to pass it and sent it to Bish.
I'm not convinced it's a good idea to legislate for one person against
the rulings of three different courts.
(Sorry, can't help the "lessons" ... it's my job. lol!)
Best,
Tod
QuadPirate wrote:
>
>
Hey Tod,Wow did I just go back to school! lol! I thought about how
many times I said I'd rather die than be in my position in the past
and in ! the hospital on the vent asked my brother to turn it off a
couple of times although I can't remember it. This was just something
that bothered me because of IVF was attacked so hard about protecting
the life that might or might not exist in a petri dish and then here
we have Terri's husband that loved her so much he put her in a
nursing home to begin with and now wants to just let her starve to
death, heck we treat death row inmates more humane than that! I just
wondered where was Bush today? Didn't he say we must preserve human
life at all cost?My only point is that Terri is more alive than
anything in a petri dish. Mark
-------Original Message-------
From: Tod E. Santee
Date: 03/18/05 23:09:49
To: Quad List
Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Bush Morals
Mark,
I read over the posts on this... You asked about why Bush 43 hasn't
given any of his time in defense of Terri Shiavo. Trouble is, we
have no idea how much influence Jeb Bu! sh has received from his
brother in DC.
Pres. Bush would look much too obviously conspicuous if he were to
begin meddling in the laws of his brother's state... but not those of
others.
The Florida State Appeals Courts and State Supreme Court (twice)
decided against Terri's parents and Jeb, and effectively determined
it was not a "mercy killing" but her husband abiding by her verbal
wishes and equating them to a living will as though she had recently
been injured... even though her alleged desire was expressed 15+
years ago. And these decisions are instead being made many years
post injury. (15 yrs ago, was before living wills were as enforcable
in many places as they are today.)
The mostly conservative US Supreme Court (particularly in
right-to-life, assisted suicide, disability-related cases) has twice
refused to hear the case. The Constitution gives the SCOTUS the
ability, primarily, to hear cases where matters of Const! itutional law
are at issue. This is a state law issue of marriage & guardianship,
living wills, and verbal "contracts" of sorts, etc... all matters not
covered by the Constitution. And according to the 10th Amendment,
those things are "off-limits" for the Feds -- SCOTUS included --
unless Congress finds a reasonable bill that can pass and become law
in the best interest of All the People (i.e. to promote the general
Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our
Posterity) through the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment where
Congress shows it's necessarry to permanently override the laws of
all 50 states. Otherwise, if or until that happens, anything not
expressly granted to the Federal government in the Constitution is
reserved for the States or the People. Amendment X - Powers of the
States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
nor prohibited b! y it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people.It isn't really Pres. Bush's morals to
worry about in this case... It's the fact that a severely disabled
woman is having decisions made for/about her by her husband and the
courts based on:
* Michael Schiavo's statements about something Terri might have said
prior to collapsing in 1990
(How many people have you heard say they think they's rather
be dead than in our shoes? How many of us even thought that before
our injuries? How many of them/us might change their minds once in
our shoes?)
* Quickly drafted, sudden laws based on one person's circumstances
that will apply to everyone from that point on, written for political
posturing and/or based on someone else's moral beliefs (Were Jeb
Bush's, the whole FL legislature's, and Terri Schiavo's moral beliefs
all identical?)
* Congress entertaining passing an emotional reaction bill without
due process that says:
- a State Court determines if you are incapacitated, and when you
are
- a State Court determines whether you are capable of testifying
on your behalf
- intended for a person presently incapacitated (I was once
incompacitated and unable to decide for a few weeks)
- a person's advance directive must specifically include the
witholding/withdrawal of food, fluids, or treatment in the
"applicable circumstances" (Does your advance directive specifically
say this? This is for Terri, only.)
- the person authorized to make a decision (a guardian) will have
to seek vourt approval prior to having the action taken (at this
point, advanced directives have to be violated in order to complete
court proceedings)
I can't take a position on Terri Schiavo. I've thought about it a
lot but still can't... I'm just not there, and it's not my case to
judge. But I can take a position on the state of the laws being used
to jerk these pe! ople around.
Feb. 2000 - it can be removed, (Judge Greer)
March, 2001 - wiill be removed April 20 (Greer)
Apr. 20, 2001 - can't be removed until appeals are exhausted
(District Judge Richard Lazzara)
April 24, 2001 - tube removed (SCOTUS refused to hear)
April 26, 2001 - reinsert tube (Circuit Judge Frank Quesada)
Oct 3, 2001 - removal delayed indefinitely (2nd District Court)
Nov. 22, 2002 - tube will be removed Jan. 33, 03
Dec. 13, 2002 - removal must wait (Greer) until another court hears
it
June 6, 2003 - removal upheld by 2nd District Court
Oct. 15, 2003 - tube removed
Oct. 21, 2003 - New Florida Law requires tube to be reinserted
Today - tube removed again
Best we can do is hope the best for Both families and make sure our
own affairs are in order.
Best!
Tod
(Glad to be back - if only temporarily)
>
