Submit your comments on this article |
-Short Attention Span Theater- |
11th circuit did something -- What they did remains to be seen... |
2005-03-30 |
Court to Weigh Schiavo Emergency Motion Mar 30, 9:58 AM (ET) By RON WORD PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (AP) - A federal appeals court agreed to consider an emergency bid by Terri Schiavo's parents for a new hearing on whether to reconnect her feeding tube, raising their fading hopes of keeping the severely brain-damaged woman alive. In its order late Tuesday, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals didn't say when it would decide whether to grant the hearing. It was not clear what effect reconnecting Terri Schiavo's feeding tube would have on her, as she approached her 13th day without nourishment. The order issued allowed Bob and Mary Schindler to file the appeal, even though the court had set a March 26 deadline for doing so. Its one-sentence order said: "The Appellant's emergency motion for leave to file out of time is granted." Twice last week, the court ruled against the Schindlers. In requesting a new hearing, the Schindlers argued that a federal judge in Tampa should have considered the entire state court record and not whether previous Florida court rulings met legal standards under state law. It also stated that the Atlanta federal appellate court didn't consider whether there was enough "clear and convincing" evidence that Terri Schiavo would have chosen to die in her current condition. Attorneys for the Schindlers didn't immediately return phone messages Wednesday. George Felos, Michael Schiavo's attorney, declined comment. Time was running out for Schiavo, however. Bob Schindler described his daughter on Tuesday as "failing." "She still looks pretty darn good under the circumstances," Schindler said. "You can see the impact of no food and water for 12 days. Her bodily functions are still working. We still have her." Doctors have said Schiavo, 41, would probably die within two weeks after the tube was removed March 18. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, insists he is carrying out her wishes by having the feeding tube pulled. The request for a new hearing also asks to have the tube reinserted immediately "in light of the magnitude of what is at stake and the urgency of the action required." The order was a ray of hope for the Schindlers, who are battling their son-in-law over their daughter's fate. The case has wound its way through six courts for seven years; the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene five times. Protesters keeping a 24-hour vigil outside the hospice praised the latest decision. "There's a chance for a miracle," said Christine Marriott, 43, who rushed to the hospice after hearing the news on TV. "Anything positive is a breath of life." Early Wednesday, a man was arrested when he tried to bring a plastic cup of water into the hospice. Officers stopped him at the gate as he shouted: "You don't know God from Godzilla!" He became the 48th protester arrested since the tube was removed on a court order sought by her husband. Terri Schiavo suffered catastrophic brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped for several minutes because of a chemical imbalance apparently brought on by an eating disorder. The Schindlers have maintained that their daughter would want to be kept alive. Their attorneys raised the issue of the new request after a Saturday deadline set by the court, saying they have had more time to research the issues and have become convinced that the federal court in Tampa had "committed plain error when it reviewed only the state court case and outcome history." Attorneys for the Schindlers have argued that Terri Schiavo's rights to life and privacy were being violated. "I think the courts want to be sure that there's no accusation that any legal argument was ignored," said attorney Neal Sonnett, former chairman of the American Bar Association's criminal justice section. Federal courts were given jurisdiction to review Schiavo's case after Republicans in Congress pushed through unprecedented emergency legislation aimed at prolonging her life. But federal courts at three levels have rebuffed her parents. On Tuesday, her mother, Mary Schindler, made a terse but emotional appeal to Michael Schiavo: "Michael and Jodi, you have your own children. Please, please give my child back to me." Michael Schiavo and fiancee Jodi Centonze have two children, born long after Terri Schiavo's collapse. Although supporters of the Schindlers have claimed the dehydrated woman is being denied comforts such as ice chips for her dry mouth or balm for chapped lips, Felos defended how Schiavo is being cared for. "Obviously, the parents and the siblings are desperate. Desperation may lead to different perceptions," Felos told CNN. "I can only tell you what I've seen, and Terri is dying a very peaceful, cared-for death." The Rev. Jesse Jackson prayed with the Schindlers on Tuesday and joined conservatives in calling for state lawmakers to order her feeding tube reinserted. The former Democratic presidential candidate was invited by Schiavo's parents to meet with activists outside Schiavo's hospice. His arrival was greeted by some applause and cries of "This is about civil rights!" "I feel so passionate about this injustice being done, how unnecessary it is to deny her a feeding tube, water, not even ice to be used for her parched lips," he said. "This is a moral issue and it transcends politics and family disputes." First lady Laura Bush also commented on the case Tuesday, saying the government was right to have intervened on behalf of Schiavo. "It is a life issue that really does require government to be involved," Bush said aboard a plane bound for Afghanistan, where she was promoting education and women's rights.
Above Photo - HAT TIP - DRUDGE |
Posted by:BigEd |
#7 En Banc Denied 10-2 Wilson & Tjoflat dissenting--- Decision But not only should Whittimore be impeached, they ought to consider adding Birch, a Bush 41 appointee to the court of appeals. The imperial condescending arrogance of this b-----d. I concur in the denial of rehearing en banc in this case because any further action by our court or the district court, would be improper, as I explain below. An axiom in the study of law is that âhard facts make bad law.â The tragic events that have afflicted Mrs. Schiavo and that have been compounded by the resulting passionate inter-family struggle and media focus certainly qualify as âhard facts.â And, while the members of her family and the members of Congress have acted in a way that is both fervent and sincere, the time has come for dispassionate discharge of duty. A popular epithet directed by some members of society, including some members of Congress, toward the judiciary involves the denunciation of âactivist judges.â Generally, the definition of an âactivist judgeâ is one who decides the outcome of a controversy before him according to personal conviction, even one sincerely held, as opposed to the dictates of the law as constrained by legal precedent and, ultimately, our Constitution. In resolving the Schiavo controversy it is my judgment that, despite sincere and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathersâ blueprint for the governance of a free people âour Constitution. Since I have sworn, as have they, to uphold and defend that Covenant, I must respectfully concur in the denial of the request for rehearing en banc. ![]() BIRCH |
Posted by: BigEd 2005-03-30 4:22:19 PM |
#6 Predictible : Denied 2-1 Judge Wilson, Clinton appointee. The only judge, along with Judge Tjoflat on the en banc to show humanity... By the way... Santorum is saying the House should get "involved" with Greer and Whittimore... Hannity is asking about the word "impeachment"... Santorum is saying, "that is for the house to decide..." and impeachment is the "most extreme solution." (but seemed to be ENCOURAGING the house to ACT) |
Posted by: BigEd 2005-03-30 3:47:05 PM |
#5 Hewitt and Medved on Prager discussing this now... |
Posted by: BigEd 2005-03-30 1:10:05 PM |
#4 Matt - I understand what you are saying... But if they agree to take paperwork, we may know about more where individual judges stand... Judge Pryor, eg, may be forced to declare himself. And W can then decide whether his recess appt was worth the effort, and mabye withdraw the regular appt if he doen't understand the situation.... The fact that the first en banc was refused, means that only 3 judges positions we know for sure, because of the procedural nature of the decision... This may give us more of a chance to know of these judges because of the nature of the appeal.... |
Posted by: BigEd 2005-03-30 12:54:50 PM |
#3 One more thing: the husband agreed to an autopsy. I'm sure that the procedure will be rigorous and objective. |
Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-03-30 11:27:51 AM |
#2 It's too late to save Terri. The dehydration I'm sure has done irreversible damage to Terri's organs. These judges need to be held accountable for the torture that they have inflicted on this human being that could not defend herself. |
Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-03-30 11:26:00 AM |
#1 BigEd, please don't get your hopes up. If the order is accurately stated in the article it is just procedural. |
Posted by: Matt 2005-03-30 11:10:39 AM |