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

Yes, Article 3 Section 1 makes the courts subordinate to the legislative branch.

That's not the issue. The issue is, you asked whether this was Constitutional or not. It is.

The bill text from THOMAS (S.686)
S 686 CPS

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 686
For the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

March 20, 2005
Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. MARTINEZ, and Mr. SANTORUM) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

AN ACT
For the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. RELIEF OF THE PARENTS OF THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO.

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida shall have jurisdiction to hear, determine, and render judgment on a suit or claim by or on behalf of Theresa Marie Schiavo for the alleged violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution or laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

SEC. 2. PROCEDURE.

Any parent of Theresa Marie Schiavo shall have standing to bring a suit under this Act. The suit may be brought against any other person who was a party to State court proceedings relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain the life of Theresa Marie Schiavo, or who may act pursuant to a State court order authorizing or directing the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. In such a suit, the District Court shall determine de novo any claim of a violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo within the scope of this Act, notwithstanding any prior State court determination and regardless of whether such a claim has previously been raised, considered, or decided in State court proceedings. The District Court shall entertain and determine the suit without any delay or abstention in favor of State court proceedings, and regardless of whether remedies available in the State courts have been exhausted.

SEC. 3. RELIEF.

After a determination of the merits of a suit brought under this Act, the District Court shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

SEC. 4. TIME FOR FILING.

Notwithstanding any other time limitation, any suit or claim under this Act shall be timely if filed within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 5. NO CHANGE OF SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create substantive rights not otherwise secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States or of the several States.

SEC. 6. NO EFFECT ON ASSISTING SUICIDE.

Nothing in this act shall be construed to confer additional jurisdiction on any court to consider any claim related--

(1) to assisting suicide,

(2) a State law regarding assisting suicide.

SEC. 7. NO PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION.

Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the provision of private relief bills.

SEC. 8. NO EFFECT ON THE PATIENT SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 1990.

Nothing in this act shall affect the rights of any person under the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990.

SEC. 9. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.

It is the Sense of the Congress that the 109th Congress should consider policies regarding the status and legal rights of incapacitated individuals who are incapable of making decisions concerning the provision, withholding, or withdrawal of foods, fluid, or medical care.

I hope you're not holding your breath on that question. But that IS the question I have. What will they all do if that judge finds no reason to overturn Florida courts? I suppose it can be appealed to SCOTUS, but they have already refused the case once.

The bill text from THOMAS (S.686)
S 686 CPS

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 686
For the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

March 20, 2005
Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. MARTINEZ, and Mr. SANTORUM) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

AN ACT
For the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. RELIEF OF THE PARENTS OF THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO.

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida shall have jurisdiction to hear, determine, and render judgment on a suit or claim by or on behalf of Theresa Marie Schiavo for the alleged violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution or laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

SEC. 2. PROCEDURE.

Any parent of Theresa Marie Schiavo shall have standing to bring a suit under this Act. The suit may be brought against any other person who was a party to State court proceedings relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain the life of Theresa Marie Schiavo, or who may act pursuant to a State court order authorizing or directing the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. In such a suit, the District Court shall determine de novo any claim of a violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo within the scope of this Act, notwithstanding any prior State court determination and regardless of whether such a claim has previously been raised, considered, or decided in State court proceedings. The District Court shall entertain and determine the suit without any delay or abstention in favor of State court proceedings, and regardless of whether remedies available in the State courts have been exhausted.

SEC. 3. RELIEF.

After a determination of the merits of a suit brought under this Act, the District Court shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

SEC. 4. TIME FOR FILING.

Notwithstanding any other time limitation, any suit or claim under this Act shall be timely if filed within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 5. NO CHANGE OF SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create substantive rights not otherwise secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States or of the several States.

SEC. 6. NO EFFECT ON ASSISTING SUICIDE.

Nothing in this act shall be construed to confer additional jurisdiction on any court to consider any claim related--

(1) to assisting suicide,

(2) a State law regarding assisting suicide.

SEC. 7. NO PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION.

Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the provision of private relief bills.

SEC. 8. NO EFFECT ON THE PATIENT SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 1990.

Nothing in this act shall affect the rights of any person under the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990.

SEC. 9. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.

It is the Sense of the Congress that the 109th Congress should consider policies regarding the status and legal rights of incapacitated individuals who are incapable of making decisions concerning the provision, withholding, or withdrawal of foods, fluid, or medical care.

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.

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

The Courts get their power from Congress.

The Congress establishes -- meaning creates and funds -- all lower federal courts. However, the Supreme Court governs/manages them. Here's the controlling language from the Constitution:

Article III, Section 2

Clause 2: In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

A short and cogent answer from The Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal:

Think of an analogy to the writ of habeas corpus. As John Eastman of the Claremont Institute points out, "We have federal court review of state court judgments all the time in the criminal law context." The bill before Congress essentially treats the Florida judgment as a death sentence, warranting federal habeas review. Mrs. Schiavo is not on life support. The court order to remove the feeding tube is an order to starve her to death. Moreover, Mrs. Schiavo is arguably being deprived of her life without due process of law, a violation of the 14th Amendment that Congress has the power to address.

The whole article is worth a read.

Congress has authority to give jurisdiction to federal courts to hear federal cases. The problem with this particular matter is that there doesn't appear to be a federal case for the court to hear at all, regardless of the grant of jurisdiction. Congress can give jurisdiction to the court; but neither Congress nor the court can pull a case out of its ass, which is what they're trying to do here.

he United States Constitution does not authorize Congress to involve itself in an individual legal matter

On the other hand, Congress does a great job of making sure American horses aren't fed to foreigners.

SENATOR FEINSTEIN'S HORSE SLAUGHTER BILL
"A bill worthy of support will be introduced soon in Congress by California's Senator Dianne Feinstein to prohibit the slaughter of American horses for human consumption abroad."

Barney Frank co-sponsored a similar bill in the House.

They didn't make a court. They made a law to get someone into an established Federal Court.

Good point, Shermy, and one I overlooked.

Congress controls the courts.

HUH? Congress CONTROLS the courts? Doesn't that violate separation of powers? What happened to three branches of government?

So in summary it does mention Terri. It appears to be an expansion of venue.

We have illegal left wing radical courts and a reaction to this in Congress and the House. Newtons law sates for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. They may not be able to impeach the judges but they can make new law and do not have to circumvent it.

It is good and right. Life, even ne life is precious. Terri is not a vegetable as is misleadingly and falsely reported. She is alive, moving, and aware.

As president Bush said 'It is better to err on the side of life'

There is no Right to die.

Thanks, Onyx. Got to make so-called conservatives think about the Constitutional implications.

While I have the opportunity, is all well with you and yours?

Where is the power of the courts to get involved? It's not in the Constitution. So that means the court must get its power from the legislature, and if it does get its power from the legislature, then the legislature has the right to change that legal authority.

I hope we remember these arguments when some skid is on death row i doubt the rats will be sayin the federal courts dont have authority

Cruel and unusual punishment applies only to criminal cases. As for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that's comes from the Declaration of Independence, not from the controlling law of our land, the United States Constitution.