[quote]janus2469 wrote:
Bush and congress are playing “whore” to create an illlusion of respecting thier “debt” to, in this case, the religious “not so” right. This was a direct and deliberate assault on states rights. There has always been and should always remain the rule of law that says, except in captial and other specific cases, state court rulings are not just a warm up.
Usurptation of states rights and responsibilities in ajudication by the back door, back handed, hand wringing boo-hooing jihadist “right to life” panderers had been handeld correctly by the Supreme Court and Jeb Bush. Unfortunately we may not yet be done dealing with the 15 minutes of fame that some of these out of the woodwork “neonazis= our way or the highway” are trying to cram down the collective throat of America. [/quote]
A little basic jurisdiction for you.
State courts have authority to interpret state law and federal law. State courts are known as courts of general jurisdiction. Their decisions can be appealed to federal court when the state courts make a ruling on a federal law claim.
In this case, the Schindlers have advanced a very weak Constitutional claim involving what I believe is substantive due process (a very bad theory for any strictu constructionists, originalists, or those who think Roe v. Wade was bad legal reasoning).
The Federal Courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Congress sets the jurisdiction for the lower federal courts, while the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction is set by the Constitution.
In general, federal court jurisdiction is limited to questions of federal law and diversity jurisdiction (i.e. disputes between residents of different states involving some minimum amount of money).
In this situation, Congress basically passed a law telling the lower federal court their jurisdiction included the Schaivo case, and they needed to hear the federal law claim. Congress could feasibly have done something more results oriented, but the law they passed was process oriented – it just told the federal court to hear the claim.
The first set of cases and appeals had to do with the request for an injunction ordering the feeding tubes reinserted so that the merits of the case could be decided. If Schaivo dies, the question becomes moot and the case is closed.
However, to get such an injunction not only do you have to demonstrate a very large probability of an event occuring to make the case moot or cause irreversible damage (which was definitely present here), you also have to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merit of the claim. THat is what the federal lower-court judge ruled was absent – there was not a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the federal law claim.
On appeal, the appellate court reviews on a very deferential standard known as “abuse of discretion.” Basically, in order to overturn the lower court, the appellate court would not only have to rule that he was wrong, but that he was so wrong (either in fact, in law or in procedure) that he violated his judicial discretion.
The 11th Circuit panel, and the entire 11th Circuit sitting en banc, upheld the lower court based on a review under the “abuse of discretion” standard.
[NOTE: a small digression, but people should note that Judge Pryor, whom the Democrats filibustered under the absurd theory that he could not separate his Cathlolic religious views from his duties as a judge, was not one of the judges who filed a dissent. Two did. One appointed by Clinton, and one by Reagan]
The Supreme Court refused to review the 11th Circuit decision on the injunction.
Now the case is back before the lower federal court judge, who is hearing the case on the merits.
In other words, we’re pretty far from the overturning of the rule of law in this case.
I disagree with what Congress did – mostly because the Constitutional claim on the merits seems especially weak, but this is all going on under the auspices of the Constitution and the rule of law.
By the way if you read his posts closely, (as I have had the honor to do) they never really make sense. They go something like this: “Bluster bluster…BOOO bluster…AHH…I…I…I…ME…ME…HI!”