Posted on 03/23/2005 9:37:12 AM PST by xzins
The difference being, presidential pardons are part of the president's constitutional authority. He cannot simply use federal marshalls as his own personal palace guard.
Sure they do, where have you been the last couple of years. Show me in the Constitution where it says judges get to decide what marriage is. Show me in the Constitution where it says that political speech can be denied to the people. We don't need a legislature anymore, the courts make the laws.
Jeb needs to direct Division of Children and Family Services to go in and take custody of Terri while DCF conducts its investigation of allegations of abuse at the hands of Michael Schiavo.
DCF takes custody away from abusive or negligent legal guardians ALL THE TIME. Perfectly legal, and in this case, the right thing to do.
You need to recognize that the law surrounding legislative is fairly unclear especially with respect to third parties who tamper with evidence and witnesses. I cannot think of situation similar to this one.
How about "conspiracy to commit life in defiance of a state court order"? That should get her 5 to 10...
If only Terri were a hamster, then Kerry would jump in to save her...
The law passed earlier this week by Congress specifically makes this a federal issue. Therefore, the Justice Department and President can rightfully get involved.
In other words, BOTH Pres. Bush and Gov. Bush can legitimately get involved.
I'm not wasting your time. I want my directives preserved however I write them. Perhaps that is what the judges are trying to do?
Right. Rather than intervene to prevent Terri's murder, he should concern himself more with Robert's Rules of Order.
Everyone involved in Terri's murder, from the nurses to the cops enforcing the court order, have an obligation to ignore it. "Just following orders" is no defense.
The most likely candidate right now for saving Terri's life is Jeb. He should send in the National Guard.
That was his only comment, it was in response to the first question asked. I don't believe there were any others, at least if there were I didn't hear them and I have the radio on here in my office.
Why doesn't George Bush go to Florida and walk up to the door of the clinic with a bottle of water. This would be much more effective than sending Federal marshalls, etc. The local police would have to arrest the President and haul him off to jail. I bet all hell would break loose then.
I didn't know President Bush lived in the hospice.
Any action outside of his constitutional authority would not be effective as President Bush would be impeached. Additionally, you are advocating an ends justifies the means position. So, would your action of traveling to Florida and inserting the feeding tube not just as effective as if President Bush did so.
Furthermore, in the face of evil, illegal and immoral laws, why does your obligation to support your family outweigh the death of an innocent? And doesn't President Bush have a similar obligation to support his family? And should that not be weighed in his decision whether to take action outside of the scope of his constitutional authority.
That is exactly my point. Court-made law is not valid and the President is not bound to respect it (as long as he has a House majority or 34 Senate votes to turn back impeachment. Remember - impeachment doesn't need a reason. Certainly one of the ducks being lined up.)
Hm. What's it to ya?
I copied the quoted section in the title immediately as I listened to it.
I'm certain of its accuracy to a 99.9999999% level.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.