U.S. Constitution & Congress: Where’s their power to get involved in Schiavo case?

U.S. Constitution via House of Representatives website ^ | 3/21/05

[Wolfstar]

United States Constitution

Article I. Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;

Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, byCession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

[mrsmith]

They make a reasonable federal statutorial claim:

"Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act... ...Defendant's Hospice's and Schiavo's execution of Defendant Judge Greer's order to remove her feeding tube imposes a substantial burden on Terri's religious free exercise."

This law requires some federal rule for when food and water can be denied against a person's apparent religious beliefs. The say-so of the next of kin may be enough, or it may not.

[Brilliant]

Well, it looks like the post claiming that the tube was re-inserted has been deleted by the moderator. Still not clear what's going on.

It was an interesting exchange. Sorry I can't go on. I've gotta get going.

[the herald]

They don't comment if they choose not to hear a case.

[torchthemummy]

If Mumia Abu Jamal gets Federal review then Terri can to.

[eastsider]

Mercy is always a virtue, murder a vice:

[O]f all the virtues which relate to our neighbor, mercy is the greatest, even as its act surpasses all others, since it belongs to one who is higher and better to supply the defect of another, in so far as the latter is deficient.

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, IIb, 30, no.4.

[Peach]

I'm glad to see these issues being discussed on this forum; it will be interesting indeed to see what the Court decides to do. Thanks for posting the thread, Wolfstar.

[Wolfstar]

You're welcome, as always, Peach.

[Chena]

"Man oh man- this is one complex case. I change my mind hour by hour as I read and learn more about the law(s). I am as worried for the Consitutuion as I am for Teri. The ONE thing I'm certain of- her husband is shameless."

Yes, this is a complex case. Changing your mind, hour by hour, as you read and learn more suggests that you are an open-minded person, who wants to base an opinion on facts, rather than emotions. We need more of that sort of commonsense approach around here. :)

[Bigh4u2]

"They don't comment if they choose not to hear a case."

I understand that.

I was just wondering what their reasons were for not hearing the case, if any, and in what form it was presented.

Was this an appeal of Judge Greers decision or the decision of the State Supreme court declaring 'Terri's Law' unconstitutional?

[Dave S]

A private bill is not unconstitutional per se. It would have to grant Terri's parents special privileges or treatment not available to other citizens. All the law does is allow them to file a case. I don't believe a federal court would find that a constitutional infirmity; for to find it as such is to deny them recourse to the courts of law and to deny them justice

I dont have the right to file suit under this law and no one else does. Therefore its constitutionallity is questionable. The reason they dont have recourse to the courts is they dont have standing just like you dont have standing in court to question your neighbors medical care.

[1L]

I don't have a problem with Congress tailoring a law to a single case where it appears that the judge does not have the best interest of the person in mind, when in fact, that's the judge's sole legal responsiblity.

If Congress wants to act in any or all of these cases, that's fine with me.

In my opinion, Jeb should have gone in there with the state police and informed everyone that the judge's order to remove the feeding tube would not be enforced. We've seen over the last 5 years what a circus of a legal system Florida has. They have to be stopped, and if it takes an act of Congress to do it, I'm all for it.

[izzatzo]

Well, if it's worth repeating, be sure you spell "exume" correctly-it should he "exhumed." I didn't realize I had left the "h" out until already posted. Forgive the breakdown, if you will.

[katnip]

I already have a decade-old agreement with one of my parents to refuse them care in this sort of situation. I intend to honor it. This is not a decision for everyone, but I intend to honor. It is the business of no one but my family primarily and our religious leaders secondarily.

Good for you. I've already told my husband who has a terminal illness that if he wants to be starved and dehydrated to death when he can't talk anymore that he'd better put it in writing and make someone else his guardian.

[demlosers]

Read again...there are inferior courts because there is a Supreme Court.

Actually, inferior courts do not have to exist. They exist because Congress has established an inferior court system.

[Alberta's Child]

If the facts of the case are as I understand them, then there has been NO due process despite the years of litigation and appeals. At the very least, Terri Schiavo would have to be provided legal counsel to act on her behalf and look out for her interests aside from what her so-called "husband" would want for her.

[bigeasy_70118]

LOL - He makes a good point - just what DOES Roy Black have to say about this ? ( so far he's lost every procedure for Rush )

As we have known since Elian, Florida is a legal cesspool. Losing on procedural motions in a Florida state court, does not mean Rush's case is lost or that Mr. Black is an incompetent attorney.

[blinachka]

The argument is that due process of law has been achieved.

Yes, for MICHAEL Schiavo there has been due process but not for Terri Schiavo. The attorneys involved have been representing Terri's estranged husband and her parents. What attorneys have represented HER? Some will argue that as her legal guardian, it is the same as representing her, but there is much disagreement on that considering the many questions raised in this case over the years. There are questions of conflicts of interest for example.

[the herald]

your quote only addresses mercy. how does the good Saint feel about euthenasia? is it merciful?

[the herald]

Dunno. A pass to me is a pass.

[MACVSOG68]

The difference is that in Bush v. Gore, the U.S. Constitution clearly gives Congress the authority to lay the ground rules for Presidential elections. When the Florida Supreme Court issued a ruling calling for a statewide recount that extended beyond the original certification date for the Electoral College, the U.S. Supreme Court had no business getting involved. The original certification date should have stood, and if Florida couldn't get its act together to meet that deadline (for whatever reason) then their electoral votes simply would not have been counted.

That appears to be more a distinction than a difference. Someone would have addressed the issue whether Congress in refusing to count the electoral votes, giving the election to Gore and thus violating Bush's 14th Amendment rights, or the USSC in deciding that standardless manual recounts constituted a 14th Amendment violation. Perhaps the USSC accepted jurisdiction following the Florida SC decision knowing that ultimately it would get the case. Let's face it...it was an equal protection issue, even if premature.