Court appeals now seem to be truly over in the Terri Schiavo case after news that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected yet another appeal to reconnect her feeding tube — and a scathing comment from an Atlanta appeals court over President George Bush’s and Congress’ intervention in the case.
The Supreme Court’s decision was bluntly straightforward:””The application for a stay of enforcement of judgment pending the filing and disposition of a petition … presented to Justice (Anthony) Kennedy and by him referred to the court, is denied,” the Supreme Court said in its decision.
But the earlier rejection from the Atlanta appeals court contained a no-holds-barred statement from one judge that fits in with the piece below by leading libertarian blogger Glenn Reynolds:
One of the Atlanta judges, Justice Stanley Birch, assailed as unconstitutional a law passed by Congress and signed by Bush that sought to get the Schiavo case reviewed by pushing into the federal courts a matter that had long been decided by state courts.
“In resolving the Schiavo controversy it is my judgment that, despite sincerity and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathers’ blueprint for the governance of a free people — our Constitution,” Birch wrote in an opinion.
And that’s the crux of it:
- This has not been just another legal case.
- The President has not often rushed back from Crawford, Texas to sign a law — and didn’t HAVE to do so in order for this law to take effect. His advisors, looking at polls incidicating the vast majority of Americans including many Republicans are unhappy about his/Congress’ intervention in this case, are now putting out the line that he didn’t wasn’t enthusiastic about signing signthe law after all and was persuaded to do. Slicing spin away that does NOT make sense: he could have signed it in Texas. Bottom line: his intervention was unwise in terms of Presidential power and political impact on all but the segment of Christian Evangelicals that wanted it (and polls show that group split as well).
- Congress, being spurred on by Tom DeLay who has been under fire due to ethics abuse allegations, unwisely stepped in — and in it — in this case. It virtually admitted that this was unprecendented and should NOT be a precedent by limiting its intervention to just this ONE case.
Clearly, efforts will continue to get Florida Governor Jeb Bush to somehow intervene in this case. But when the main political, legal and, sadly, physiological aspects of this case have subsided voters need to ponder the messages of the courts and legal aspects such as law professor Reynolds.
Some of Schiavo’s supporters will say because the courts didn’t listen to Congress or them its shows a judiciary staffed with “activist judges” who are out of control.
But many Americans will breathe a sign of relief due to the courts’ steadfast independence in this case since what was out of control here were politicians more interested in winning than preserving cherished constitutional and political traditions.
The bulk of Americans may differ over myriad court rulings, but most will likely conclude that the kind of rubber-stamp judges these politicians may soon clamor for in Congress are not be the kinds of judges our founding fathers had in mind.
The issue is NOT liberal or conservative judges; the issue is about needing to have have judges to stand back, take a deep breath, look at the law and evalulate it, ignoring political pressures on either side. And needing to have politicians professional enough to accept powers alloted to another branch of government.
This case was NOT about activist judges. It was about over-reaching politicians disdainful of our system’s venerable legal system with its underlying assumption that court rulings’ LEGITIMACY are accepted out of a fundamental respect for our constitution and to strength it — not that if the judgements don’t go your way the rules are changed in the legal system to try and get rulings in your or a constituent group’s favor.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.