Schiavo legislation still-born: U.S. Supreme Ct. refuses to hear case.

[Seabiscuit]

The Repukes' desperate action in passing an unconstitutional law (in violation of the Equal Protection Clause, and violative of states' rights) allowing federal courts to hear the Schiavo case and overrule Florida state court decisions on the matter just collapsed in the mud of its own making: first a federal trial court judge, then the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to do the Repukes' bidding, upholding the state court rulings, now the U.S. Supreme Court again refused to hear the case, in effect upholding all the state and federal court decisions.

In two short days this outrageous piece of purely political legislation has become the shortest-lived law in U.S. history. As it only gave standing to the parents of Schiavo, and since they exhausted their judicial remedies with the U.S. Supreme Court's denial of a hearing, and applies to no one else in the world, it is now defunct.

Guess the theocratic Repukes really miscalculated on this one - they don't have as many friends in the federal judiciary as they thought they did.

:bounce:

[fryguy]

1. court denied cert?

not seeing anything on CNN, MSNBC, et al - do you have a link?

[Seabiscuit]

2. Yes, they denied cert - heard on local TV station. No link yet.

[Seabiscuit]

3. CNN, MSNBC and Fox will probably be the last to report it. They're still

working on how to "spin" it. Rove's working on a memo for O'Reilly as we speak.

[Lone Pawn]

13. CNN reported the appeals court ruling within minutes of it happening.

Not as an article, just as a "BREAKING NEWS" banner on the top of each page. As did MSNBC. And for two hours before that, there was "SCHIAVO RULING IMMINENT." Here there's nothing about an SC ruling.

[incapsulated]

4. They already refused twice before

And there is nothing new in this case. This wasn't surprising, although I take nothing for granted, anymore.

[flpoljunkie]

5. Link for this information, please.

[OxmanYells]

14. is it online somewhere?

I can' find it anywhere.

[katsy]

6. Unless...

They start screaming about "activist" judges.

Then their sheep start posting the judge's personal info (like address) on webpages which encourages rw fundie militants get violent.

Then they go nuclear in the Senate to push through monkey boy's judicial appointments.

When have these criminals ever taken no for an answer?

:scared:

I hope I'm wrong.

[Mabus]

7. What do you expect from liberal court system? LOL

Isn't that the next play for the GOP, claiming that it is the liberal courts that allowed this to happen? I saw something on CNN (?) last night where Limbaugh and others were talking about the liberal court and, you guessed it, BBC (Blame Bill Clinton).

The Supreme Court had to rule this way. Their only other option was their infamous "limited holding" shit they pulled in Bush v. Gore.

[seabeyond]

8. or judges that want to blantly break constitution n/t

[incapsulated]

9. CNN/MSNBC aren't reporting this

They are still reporting that it is in the process of an appeal to the Supreme Court, no ruling.

[_TJ_]

10. Don't tell me sanity will actually prevail ? n/t

[Lone Pawn]

11. Link?

I can't find any information to that effect.

[DemoTex]

12. Exit Supremes stage left; enter Jeb stage far right.

Watch Jeb stick his snout back in this. On the other hand, maybe Jeb doesn't have a political death wish like Toxic-Tom Delay.

On edit: Jeb's snout is back in it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1334983


GOP moral bankruptcy Bill.

[Discord]

15. I think Jeb is gonna be laying low on

this one from now on. If it had worked out like they wanted it, they would have showered him with praise for his 7 years of fighting this battle, but now want him off the hook and out of the media as to not jeapordize a possible presidential bid.

Great cannonfodder for the Dems should he run though.

[Jacobin]

16. I DON'T THINK THIS HAS HAPPENED YET!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's not spread disinformation. I can't find a link anywhere as of right now.

I think this WILL happen, but please hold off until we get the word.

:hi:

[OxmanYells]

17. NEW INFO.......

Schindlers have decided to go back to the Appellate Court in Atlanta to get a review by all 11 judges! What does that mean? How is it different from the Supreme Court and what are their chances? Appreciate any help. Thanks.

[Lone Pawn]

18. Link?

Not on CNN.

[Jacobin]

19. It's called an en banc hearing

A three judge panel hears the case first....they turned them down. Now they are asking for a re-hearing en banc....before 11 judges. If that is turned down, then they go to the supremes.

[fryguy]

21. its called an en banc review

permits all the judges of the court of appeals to review the case.

[Lone Pawn]

20. EVEN NEWER INFO...

THE GHOST OF JOHN JAY HAS COME DOWN AND INTERVENED ON BEHALF OF MICHAEL SCHIAVO! THE PARENTS ARE GOING TO APPEAL TO JESUS CHRIST, JUDGE OF MAN!

[fryguy]

22. fix your message please

there's been no decision yet.....

[Seabiscuit]

23. Just got back and it appears either the local TV station got it wrong or

that I misheard something (busy with the baby at the time) and coupled that with wishful thinking in my brain. Sorry. Did find a CNN article online about Schiavo's parents asking the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for an en-bank rehearing (all 12 judges), so if that's what's happening, it looks as if they have not yet submitted the case to the U.S. Supreme Court for review.