[Bigfitz]

An interesting article from a Black Robed Shylock whom is employed at his gig for life and doesnt have to answer (In his mind)to us mere mortals. I encourage the Executive and Legislative branches to act on the behalf of the Constitution and rein in these Demi Gods.

[RoseofTexas]

I blame the EVIL liberal communist law professors in our colleges who brainwashing law students to ignore and walk all over the Constitution! They along with the ACLU have been very successful in accomplishing their communist agenda! Unfortunately these students become our future high ranking judges! Now, question being, WHAT THE HECK ARE WE GONNA DO ABOUT IT??!!

[freekitty]

Coward. Could be that he was afraid if he actually heard or read anything from the parents; he would change his mind and Terri would still be living.

[farmer18th]

Freer said the public tends to react to the bottom line of court decisions, seeing them as either ``for Terri or against Terri.'' But he said it's important to be clear that judges have to be concerned with the Constitution.

What utter horse sh*t. If they really cared about the Constitution, they would allow the executive to enforce or not enforce their decisions, allowing the checks and balances to operate properly. If they cared about the jurisprudence of the founding era, they would allow juries to try law as well as fact, as no less an authority than John Jay advocated.

This guys is Pharisee who will go to hell and burn for everlasting, if he doesn't repent. May his post-stroke mind get bad enough for even other judges to recognize it.

[expatguy]

His court, His opinion and therefore... His Law.

Let that be a warning to those of you who dare to question the edicts issued by our black-robed masters.

[Defiant]

Arrogant judicial tyrant. If this is the same one mentioned yesterday, he's supposedly conservative. If so, he has lost his way, and prefers judicial supremacy over representative democracy. I am amazed at this attitude on the part of judges. What is so unusual about Congress asking a court to review whether a state has decided to put someone to death by looking at whether the facts support the lower court? If this was a death penalty case, it would have been overturned in summary fashion, and a stay would have been ordered before they even looked at it.

[atlaw]

He's a reliably conservative judge appointed by President George Bush, and his opinion is perfectly consonant with a traditionally conservative view of the separation of powers. But now he's a "Black Robed Shylock."

This forum has been hijacked by hyperventilating children of the corn who have no more connection to conservatism than their new found hero - Jesse Jackson.

[Political Junkie Too]

His opinion accompanied a ruling by the full court refusing to hear an appeal by Schiavo's parents, who want her feeding tube reinserted.

Here's the thought that's been on my mind regarding separation of powers:

If we play word games like the Left does, then when did the power of the courts morph from issuing OPINIONS to issuing RULINGS or ORDERS?

If the Executive has the power of ACTING (executing), then the Judiciary issuing RULINGS is usurping the power to act reserved to the Executive.

There can be only one ruler in a Republic, and that is the elected executive. The Legislature makes law, the Executive enforces law, and the Judiciary offers OPINIONS on law, not decrees, orders, or rulings. The Executive should be free to accept or reject the OPINIONS of the Judiciary.

-PJ

[the invisib1e hand]

In Honor of Terri Schiavo.

Please let load -- it's 11 mb.

Have headphones or sound on.