The Supreme Court has refused to get involved in an appeal on the Terri Schiavo case — thus exhausting the traditional legal remedies in this case.
So now the question becomes: will Florida Governor Jeb Bush be able to get a court order to allow him to hold her in protective custody via some new appeal based on new grounds in Florida?
CNN reports the news that this case has now run what would normally be the typical case for any other typical citizen such as your relatives or mine:
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Thursday an appeal by the parents of Terri Schiavo to have their severely brain-damaged daughter’s feeding tube reinserted.The court, without comment, refused to intervene after the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals twice Wednesday turned down a plea from the parents, Bob and Mary Schindler
The fate of Terri Schiavo is also in a waiting stage on another front — the Florida circuit court where the judicial wrangling began seven years ago.
CNN notes that there have been 20 court rulings siding with Schiavo’s husband/guardian Michael Schiavo and that the courts have ruled that evidence indicates she had expressed her wishes. More on the Court ruling:
The Supreme Court petition was given to Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has jurisdiction over emergency appeals in cases arising in the 11th U.S. Circuit, which includes Florida, where Terri Schiavo lives in a hospice.It was the fifth time the case has been presented to the Supreme Court, which has consistently refused to hear it.
Meanwhile, in Florida:
… Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge George Greer has said he will rule by noon Thursday on the latest effort by Florida officials to intervene in the case.Greer had ordered Schiavo’s tube removed last Friday, after seven years of court battles between the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo. The issue now before Greer involves allegations that Terri Schiavo may have been abused by her husband.
In addition, in a petition by the Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF), a neurologist who examined Schiavo’s medical records found she was “most likely in a state of minimal consciousness,” rather than the persistent vegetative state previous doctors have diagnosed.
According to the petition, the agency’s board-certified neurologist, Dr. William Polk Cheshire, has information “that seriously challenges the diagnosis that Mrs. Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state,” as courts have upheld.
“This new information raises serious concerns and warrants immediate action,” Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said.
Bush has vowed to do “everything within my power” to restore Schiavo’s feeding tube.
David Gibbs, attorney for Schiavo’s parents, called the neurologist’s findings “shocking new medical developments.”
Greer barred Florida authorities Wednesday from removing Terri Schiavo from the hospice.
This case is not over yet — not by a longshot. Why? Because it’s not in the politicians’ interest for it to be over.
QUESTION: Will we now see the Supreme Court reviled and an accelerated push to get new “non-activist” (that means judges who rule how a given side on each end of the political spectrum wants in cases) judges?
The answer to the question as to whether the Supreme Court will now come under fire if it dared to disagree with Congress and Schiavo’s parents is YES if you read the comments of Senator Bill Frist.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who was a principal figure in the last-ditch effort by Congress to intervene on Schiavo’s behalf, said he the high court rendered its decision “despite a compelling case for reexamination of the medical evidence.”
“It is a sad day for her loving family and for their innocent and voiceless daughter,” said the Tennessee Republican who played a key role in securing passage of legislation last weekend to give her parents access to the federal courts.
In other words: the Court ignored the “compelling case” for “reexamination of the medical evidence.”
A question for Senator Frist: When the Supreme Court rendered its decision on the disputed 2000 election results, weren’t the Republicans the ones loudly insisting that the highest Court had spoken and their decision should be accepted?
Three words now: Watch Jeb Bush.
See our most recent posts on this casehere and here.
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.