Debate Over Brain-Damaged Florida Woman Renews Political Divide Over 'values'

Ap ^ | 3/20/05 | Tom Raum

[mlc9852]

Florida does not recognize common law marriage.

[freedomdefender]

Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... """

Please explain how allowing appeal of Terri's case to a federal court - - without dictating any outcome in that court - - constitutes a bill of attainder, an ex post facto law, or an impairment of contract. It's none of those things. It's simly allowing another level of judicial review of a particular case, without ordaining any particular judicial outcome.

[lastchance]

In other words, " Round up the usual suspects"

[kittymyrib]

Democrat Party = Party of Death

[lastchance]

In other words, " Round up the usual suspects"

[Aliska]

It is passing strange that if this were a horse that were being starved,

Happened here this week; I posted it on another thread but not the picture or the article, just a link:

Starving, malnourished horses rescued March 16, 2005, 04:45 PM CST

Excerpt: "State employees have said Wietholder is now in violation of the Illinois Humane Care for Animals Act, with numerous incidences of failure to provide humane care and treatment, adequate food, water and shelter as well as failure to provide vet care and treatment of injured animals. The Department of Agriculture will be filing charges this week."

[kwlabr2]

FLorida does not recognize common law marriage.

[Salvation]

How did Hitlery vote?

[Salvation]

Just upgraded my web site.

You may participate in an on-line poll on my site. The poll has just been put up. It records your vote so that you cannot vote more than once.

http://newspundit.net

http://newspundit.net/terrischiavocase.html

Please pass the word.

[lolhelp]

Thanks, I didn't think so, but was not sure.

[lolhelp]

Found out some more info. Florida does not recognize common law marriage. So it is safe to say they have been shacked up for 10 years, but not married!!!!!!

[Abby4116]

I just voted. Thank you for the site.

[KDD]

Numerous courts had confirmed Terri Schiavo’s right to refuse the unwanted treatment, and the matter had been litigated to its conclusion, culminating in a final order to cease the artificial life support. The legislature’s action applies retroactively, changing the rules midstream after the parties had relied on a previous set of rules to govern their conduct, in clear violation of the 14th Amendment right to procedural due process. This lack of notice creates an unfair surprise for the parties in the case. In addition, because the legislation targets a single individual, it offends the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution, because there is no rational basis for distinguishing Terri Schiavo’s case from all other individuals who are–or may in the future be–similarly situated.

881503CONCUR v. DIRECTOR, MISSOURI DEPT. OF HEALTH

No. 881503

[June 25, 1990]

Justice Scalia, concurring.

The various opinions in this case portray quite clearly the difficult, indeed agonizing, questions that are presented by the constantly increasing power of science to keep the human body alive for longer than any reasonable person would want to inhabit it. The States have begun to grapple with these problems through legislation. I am concerned, from the tenor of today's opinions, that we are poised to confuse that enterprise as successfully as we have confused the enterprise of legislating concerning abortion requiring it to be conducted against a background of federal constitutional imperatives that are unknown because they are being newly crafted from Term to Term. That would be a great misfortune.

While I agree with the Court's analysis today, and therefore join in its opinion, I would have preferred that we announce, clearly and promptly, that the federal courts have no business in this field; that American law has always accorded the State the power to prevent, by force if necessary, suicideincluding suicide by refusing to take appropriate measures necessary to preserve one's life; that the point at which life becomes "worthless," and the point at which the means necessary to preserve it become "extraordinary" or "inappropriate," are neither set forth in the Constitution nor known to the nine Justices of this Court any better than they are known to nine people picked at random from the Kansas City telephone directory; and hence, that even when it is demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that a patient no longer wishes certain measures to be taken to preserve her life, it is up to the citizens of Missouri to decide, through their elected representatives, whether that wish will be honored. It is quite impossible (because the Constitution says nothing about the matter) that those citizens will decide upon a line less lawful than the one we would choose; and it is unlikely (because we know no more about "life-and-death" than they do) that they will decide upon a line less reasonable.

Cruzan v. Director, DMH 497 US 261 (1990)

[Iscool]

The more I think about this, the more I think that the best argument is simply that the remedy is unconstitutional. It's really a form of torture, which I thinkm, the federal government has a right to prohibit. The rest of it really is a states rights issue.

I don't know about the constitution but the moral issue is what concerns me...

They not only pulled the plug, but they refuse to let anyone try to feed her water or food...The least they could do is to give her a shot to put her to sleep, permanently, peacefully, humanely...

I agree, this is humane torture...

[Iscool]

But to some people in our government, starving a human is merely "a heart-wrenching private matter." I don't agree. I don't believe that any government in these United States can legitimately order a cruel execution via starvation for either man or beast.

Absolutely...I have read stories where people that were accused of starving animals have gone to jail...This judge may have even sent some there...

This judge should be arrested along with any person who was responsible for removing the nutrition from this lady from the nurse who pulled the plug to the State Supreme Court who condoned it...

[supercat]

The problem is the courts. I don't see how a judge could possibly have concluded that this woman was in a vegetative state, or that the appropriate thing to do was to starve her to death. The courts have lost all moral authority, as far as I can see.

The judge more likely concluded that because Terri wasn't PVS, he'd better kill her off before his malfeasance could be discovered.

[freedomdefender]

The legislature’s action applies retroactively, changing the rules midstream after the parties had relied on a previous set of rules to govern their conduct, in clear violation of the 14th Amendment right to procedural due process. This lack of notice creates an unfair surprise for the parties in the case. In addition, because the legislation targets a single individual, it offends the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution, because there is no rational basis for distinguishing Terri Schiavo’s case from all other individuals who are–or may in the future be–similarly situated.

A number of points. 1) Whatever the point of Scalia's concurrence, a concurring opinion doesn't establish any point of law, and can't be cited as precedent. You cite the majority opinion for the precedential points of law.

2) An Equal Protection claim only applies against a law that establishes a policy that is applicable beyond a particular case, and the policy treats some people differently than others, for constitutionally impermissible reasons. This Terri law doesn't apply to anyone other than Terri or her case. Private Member bills, which make regulatory accommodations for targeted indivuals on a one-time basis, are commonplace in Congress, and not struck down as "offensive to Equal Protection."

3) There is no "unfair surprise" here in any sense that you suggest - - the situation will be judged by the standards of the federal constitution and federal statutes. They applied in any case, so all parties in medical situations are presumptively on notice that federal law and the constitution govern them. All that's happening is that another level of appellate review will be allowed, but the standards and laws applicable aren't different, so nobody's being blindsided in an impermissible way.

[supercat]

So, the "husband" has coughed up a lot of cash to the attorney helping him kill his "wife". Hmm, after all this time I bet the legal bills are a monster. I wonder what the "husband" will do once he sees that he's about to get cut out of any money from her death? That she might live a very long life with her parents. And that she might just start really communicating someday soon.

The only rational explanation I can formulate for the behavior of Michael, Felos, and Greer is that they all know Terri isn't PVS, and that if they lose control of Terri it will become obvious that they all knew. Three counts of attempted murder on each of them, plus who knows how many counts of torture, etc. as well.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Frankly I don't give a crap about "values". But it is a legal travesty to have the decision as to whether to end someone's life left in the hands of a person who clearly has a vested interest in wanting her dead. Given that Florida law apparently hasn't been able to effectively neutralize that travesty, it's appropriate for the federal government to step in. If Florida doesn't like the federal government butting in on its business, then this will serve as a wake-up call to them that they need to get their state legal system in order.

[Soul Seeker]

yeah, that's what I noticed about the piece. IF this were all about politics for the Reps, they wouldn't have jumped into this Friday. Why? because the polls showed it a losing issue for them. Thing is the Reps basically stuck their finger out at the polls and did as their conscience led. Maybe there is political calculation in the midst, but I've seen these Reps. The emotion, the harried action, the untamed words ARE genuine.

Whereas the Dems don't know how to act, which is why so many are silent. Circumstances are changing hourly and polling cannot keep up accurately. They know where their base stands, but are afraid of the middle ground shifting and identifying them as the party of death.