Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Supreme Court Protects Liberty (ACLU on Schiavo-Starvation Death Protects Liberty)
ACLU ^ | March 24, 2005 | ACLU Press Release

Posted on 03/26/2005 7:55:14 PM PST by huac

"MIAMI - The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida today welcomed the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection of a petition forcing the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tubes, a decision that protects the severely brain-damaged woman’s right to withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment and prevents politicians from interfering with intensely personal medical decisions...The ACLU of Florida filed a 47-page brief with the High Court early this morning, asking the Justices to reject efforts to reinsert Schiavo’s feeding tube..."

(Excerpt) Read more at aclu.org ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aclu; cultureofdeath; deathculture; moonbat; schiavo; terri; terrischiavo
U.S. Supreme Court Protects Liberty by Upholding Terri Schiavo’s Decision to Discontinue Medical Treatment, Says ACLU of Florida

March 24, 2005

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: media@aclu.org

MIAMI - The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida today welcomed the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection of a petition forcing the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tubes, a decision that protects the severely brain-damaged woman’s right to withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment and prevents politicians from interfering with intensely personal medical decisions.

"Terri Schiavo’s wishes were honored today by yet another court that recognized her constitutionally protected right to refuse and withdraw medical treatment," said Howard Simon, Executive Director of the ACLU of Florida. "If the court had ruled otherwise, the nation may have taken a giant step backward in the protection of privacy and made it harder for families to make these difficult but intensely personal end-of-life decisions without the intrusion of politicians."

The ACLU of Florida filed a 47-page brief with the High Court early this morning, asking the Justices to reject efforts to reinsert Schiavo’s feeding tube, which was removed on Friday following a court order. The brief was filed on behalf of Michael Schiavo, Terri’s husband of 18 years and her legal guardian. For nearly seven years, he has fought a legal battle to carry out his wife’s choice to disconnect her feeding and hydration tubes, which have sustained her for more than a decade. Schiavo has been in a persistent vegetative state since she suffered cardiac arrest in 1990.

"Nowhere in his approach to this case, or in his relationship with his wife and ward, has Michael Schiavo ever underestimated the gravity of the inevitably consequence of his wife’s choice not to be forced to receive nutrition and hydration in her vegetative state," the ACLU said in its brief. "However, as Mrs. Schiavo herself recognized when she was in a position to communicate to her husband her wish not to be forced to undergo unwanted medical treatment, there are other important values and issues at stake in this case … first and foremost among these values is Mrs. Schiavo’s constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment."

Today’s decision follows a series of recent court rulings that upheld Terri Schiavo’s wish to discontinue medical treatment. On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge James Whittemore denied a temporary restraining order that would have forced the reinsertion of Schiavo’s feeding tube. A three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld Whittemore’s decision early Wednesday morning. Later that same day, the full appeals court also ruled that there is no legal basis to needlessly prolong this tragic saga by overriding state legal procedures in this case.

The case moved to federal court on Monday, following unprecedented action by Congress giving federal courts the authority to fully review her case. The federal bill was the second attempt by politicians to disregard Terri Schiavo’s wishes and intervene in her case. In October 2003, the Florida Legislature passed a one-time bill giving Florida Governor Jeb Bush the authority to reinsert her nutrition and hydration tubes without the consent of her husband and duly appointed guardian. The ACLU challenged the law and it was struck down as unconstitutional by every Florida court; the U.S. Supreme Court again declined to hear the appeal.

In another attempt to circumvent the courts, Gov. Jeb Bush sought a court order to allow the Department of Children & Families to take "emergency action" to reinsert the feeding tubes against her wishes.

"He concocted a way to use the machinery of state government to overrule the court judgment that we have to honor Terri Schiavo’s wishes," Simon explained.

But before the political pressure mounted, Gov. Bush also had expressed faith in the judicial system and said he felt it was necessary to honor Schiavo’s wishes. On August 26, 2003, in a letter to a circuit court judge, he wrote: "… Our system of government has committed these decisions to the judicial branch, and we must respect that process." He went on to add: "No one involved should be permitted to circumvent due process or the Court’s authority in order to achieve personal objectives in this case."

"The governor was right in August 2003," said Simon. "Nothing has changed medically. Her medical condition has been confirmed and re-confirmed, even by a Guardian Ad Litem appointed by the court and at the Governor’s insistence. Nothing has changed legally; in fact, determinations that were made in 2003 that she would not want to be artificially sustained have been upheld over and over again. What has changed is the politics of the Terry Schiavo case."

1 posted on 03/26/2005 7:55:16 PM PST by huac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: huac

God Bless America - To Hell With The ACLU!!


2 posted on 03/26/2005 7:56:46 PM PST by Keith in Iowa (Michael Schiavo = Scott Peterson - 1 boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: huac

The ACLU is correct on this one. Case closed.


3 posted on 03/26/2005 7:57:06 PM PST by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: huac
The ACLU is Orwellian. It misstates the facts of the case and fails to mention the woman in question is being STARVED to death. Again this is the same organization that does double back flips for convicted murderers and alleged terrorists.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
4 posted on 03/26/2005 7:57:37 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: huac

The only way I see the ACLU protecting liberty if they all were to starve to death themselves. Thanks, but I'll let Winchester protect my libery.


5 posted on 03/26/2005 7:57:54 PM PST by WKUHilltopper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: huac

If you are a cop killer, baby-raper or terrorist bent on the destruction of America, the ACLU are your go-to guys. A severely handicapped woman who can't tell you what she wants? The ACLU says starve her to death...they can't let those right to life types have a victory. Mrs. Schiavo is merely collateral damage in their political games.


6 posted on 03/26/2005 7:58:17 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Keith in Iowa

"God Bless America - To Hell With The ACLU!!"

Indeed.


7 posted on 03/26/2005 8:00:44 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: huac

The ACLU is a stealth organization, founded and funded by forces external to the United States. Have you ever heard of a case where the ACLU help a normal person?


8 posted on 03/26/2005 8:01:14 PM PST by atomicweeder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

"The ACLU is Orwellian..."

I suspect that the ACLU would have scared Orwell.


9 posted on 03/26/2005 8:02:03 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: zarf
The ACLU is correct on this one. Case closed.

I haven't been getting involved in this one, but saying that it's "a decision that protects the severely brain-damaged woman’s right to withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment" is utter horse manure, typical of the lies we've come to expect from our favorite Leftist catspaw.

10 posted on 03/26/2005 8:03:01 PM PST by an amused spectator (If Social Security isn't broken, then cut me a check for the cash I have into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: huac

I hope no one is surprised. I never expected more from the ACLU. It is trying to destroy everything good and decent about our lives and country.


11 posted on 03/26/2005 8:03:14 PM PST by Virginia Queen (Virginia Queen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: huac
[Bleep]ing - unbelievable
12 posted on 03/26/2005 8:05:04 PM PST by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zarf

The ACLU is rarely right and this case is in exception. No one should be forced to starve to death without their written consent, especially when 33 doctors have stated their is hope for a meaningful recovery. This government-mandated euthanasia.


13 posted on 03/26/2005 8:05:13 PM PST by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: zarf

Don't you mean, 'Casket Closed.'?


14 posted on 03/26/2005 8:06:14 PM PST by freecopper01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: zarf

scuse me, barf?


15 posted on 03/26/2005 8:06:20 PM PST by The Red Zone (Florida: the sun-shame state.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky

Legalized murder.


16 posted on 03/26/2005 8:06:56 PM PST by freecopper01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: WKUHilltopper
The only way I see the ACLU protecting liberty if they all were to starve to death themselves. Thanks, but I'll let Winchester protect my libery.

I couldn't agree more. Trusting the ACLU is synonymous with trusting Satan himself. I have more faith in Glock and Colt.
17 posted on 03/26/2005 8:07:38 PM PST by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: huac
"Terri Schiavo’s wishes were honored today by yet another court that recognized her constitutionally protected right to refuse and withdraw medical treatment," said Howard Simon, Executive Director of the ACLU of Florida.

The problem with this statement is that we do NOT know, for a fact, that this was Terri's wish. If we knew it, for a FACT, there would be no question as to her right to this outcome. In this case there are many people who know and love her who seriously doubt that Michael's word in this case is trustworthy.

Should we not be erring on the side of life, and not death? Doesn't the burden of proof rest with the ones who say that she would want to die, rather than with the ones who say that she would want to live? Sadly, Judge Greer has made it very clear that the family needed to be able to prove, with a greater degree of clearity, that Terri wished to live than Michael had to prove that she wished to die. I know ... some disagree with this analysis; but that is how it appears to me.

If I were caught in this circumstance my Advanced Directive states I do not wish to be maintained in a PVS. However, if I didn't have such an Advanced Directive, I would hope that the legal system would base its conclusion upon a more-sound standard than has been applied here; and, if any reasonable doubt existed, I would HOPE that my civil rights be as protected as the common criminal's. Yes, I know courts have claimed that Terri's civil rights have not been violated; horror of horrors of horrors, I'm afraid I disagree.
18 posted on 03/26/2005 8:09:46 PM PST by TexasGreg ("Democrats Piss Me Off")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: huac

The ACLU always favors death ~ this is not news.


19 posted on 03/26/2005 8:10:32 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freecopper01
Legalized murder.

Well at least for once our Republican leadership is in full implicit agreement with the ACLU. If it were otherwise, they would have corrected this miscarriage of justice by now.
20 posted on 03/26/2005 8:12:45 PM PST by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: zarf

"The ACLU is correct on this one. Case closed."

Early in his political career, Hitler wanted to improve the hoorendous German economy. He was correct on that one. He then used that economy to destroy Europe and send people to the ovens. You can't separate one case from the ACLU agenda and say that "they are correct on this one". The ACLU is a seditious organization bent on the destruction of America as we know it.


21 posted on 03/26/2005 8:13:36 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: atomicweeder

"Have you ever heard of a case where the ACLU help a normal person?"

Let's see. Nazi's, child molesters, cop killers, terrorists. I guess you can say they helped "normal people" if you a a progressive bent on the utter destruction of America.


22 posted on 03/26/2005 8:15:49 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: huac
The ACLU is a seditious organization bent on the destruction of America as we know it.

You're just saying that 'cause it's true...

23 posted on 03/26/2005 8:17:33 PM PST by an amused spectator (If Social Security isn't broken, then cut me a check for the cash I have into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator

"a decision that protects the severely brain-damaged woman’s right to withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment" is utter horse manure,"

But her husband, who stands to profit handsomely, is not ridiculous. His motives might be something much worse.


24 posted on 03/26/2005 8:17:51 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: zarf
The ACLU is just like Nazi Germany and Communist USSR. They are incorrect and if the left-wing fascist anti-American Democrats and the ACLU have their way all Jews, Christians and Republicans will be in the ovens soon. To starve someone to death was not in the Constitution until black robed fascist dictators ruled it was. Since it is now legal to starve people to death lets start with the baby killers and child molesters, Oh I am sorry thay the champions of the left-wing fascist democrats.
25 posted on 03/26/2005 8:18:35 PM PST by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

"...unbelievable..."

Not when dealing with the ACLU. In fact, expected.


26 posted on 03/26/2005 8:18:44 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TexasGreg

"The problem with this statement is that we do NOT know, for a fact, that this was Terri's wish..."

The husband, who obtained $700,000 plus to care for Terry for the rest of her life then got a common law wife and had two kids out of wedlock while refusing to divorce Terry and allowing her parents to care for her (in which case he would presumbaly lose approximately $700,000, or whatever monies were left from the funds meant to care for Terry, which he has used to pay for legal counsel to starve her to death). The whole thing is immoral and unseemly and possibly crminal. In other words, the "husband" is just the sort that the ACLU would lie in the guter with.


27 posted on 03/26/2005 8:24:27 PM PST by huac (We're not Communists, we're Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: huac

Any one who supports the ACLU is also guilty of being an anti-American fascist,


28 posted on 03/26/2005 8:24:31 PM PST by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop; zarf

MIAMI - The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida today welcomed the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection of a petition forcing the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tubes, a decision that protects the severely brain-damaged woman’s right to withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment [anybody recall Terri Schiavo "withdrawing her own life-sustaining treatment"? Anybody? Anybody? - Bueller] and prevents politicians from interfering with intensely personal medical decisions.

"Terri Schiavo’s wishes [got that in writing, Howard?] were honored today by yet another court that recognized her constitutionally protected right [!!! Yeah, the Founding Fathers were BIG on this "right"] to refuse and withdraw medical treatment," said Howard Simon, Executive Director of the ACLU of Florida. "If the court had ruled otherwise, the nation may have taken a giant step backward in the protection of privacy [hunh?] and made it harder for families [actually, ONE member of the family, who is related by marriage, but not by blood] to make these difficult but intensely personal end-of-life decisions without the intrusion of politicians [fortunately for you, Howard, lawyers and judges apparently get to stick their regal noses in wherever they want to...]."

29 posted on 03/26/2005 8:32:16 PM PST by an amused spectator (If Social Security isn't broken, then cut me a check for the cash I have into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: muawiyah

OF COURSE. ACLU TYPES STOOD BY DURING THE HOLOCAUST


31 posted on 03/26/2005 8:53:54 PM PST by avile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: huac
a decision that protects the severely brain-damaged woman’s right to withdraw her own life-sustaining treatment

Outright lie. The woman isn't capable of feeding herself and certainly can't withdraw her own treatment. Her husband has claimed that's what she wished, so this ruling in reality only protects the right of husbands to choose the time and manner of their incapacitated wives.

32 posted on 03/26/2005 9:00:08 PM PST by coloradan (Hence, etc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: huac

Shocking. The ACLU sides with the culture of death.


33 posted on 03/26/2005 9:04:36 PM PST by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc

When I was a young, goofy kid...I nearly joined the ACLU. Then they filed a suit on behalf of hookers demanding they receive ERISA benefits--retirement, health insurance. Now this may have flown in Vegas, but these hookers were "employed" in states where the practice was illegal.

It was then I concluded "these people are nuts". So I never joined and wouldn't even if tortured. I should thank them for pursuing that or I may have wound up a victim...err, I mean member.

What's next? Unemployment benefits for thieves in prison not earning "a living" because of their imprisonment?


34 posted on 03/26/2005 10:27:13 PM PST by WKUHilltopper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: avile

Yes, particularly as long as the Stalin-Hitler pact was in effect ~


35 posted on 03/27/2005 6:58:51 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
The ACLU always favors death ~ this is not news.

You should have added: unless it's for a convicted murderer/serial killer, terrorist or someone who despises the US. They're all for protecting the "rights" of criminals and thugs!

36 posted on 03/27/2005 7:12:41 AM PST by 2nd amendment mama ( www.2asisters.org Self defense is a basic human right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: huac
The ACLU's position is inconsistent.

The ACLU is against execution of criminals who have cognitive disabilities. (For instance, here and here.) In fact, they are opposed to any execution of criminals.

The ACLU favors execution of the innocent who have cognitive disabilities.

37 posted on 03/27/2005 7:31:43 AM PST by snowsislander (Isa41:17-When the poor and needy seek water,and there is none,and their tongue faileth for thirst...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson