How can you miss this?

Xrlq: Just to give you a taste of just how good that shit Whittemore’s smoking really is. . .

I knew Whittemore was “smoking really good stuff” when he took hours to reach his decision as Terri lay starving and dehydrating. There was no doubt in my mind that once 15 minutes had passed, she would get no relief from Whittemore. He knew enough about the case and his mind was made up, so he just going to twist logic in his “reasoned” opinion to reach the conclusion he wanted.

Second, Whittemore wasn’t going to allow Congress to make any laws! Forget that! Actually, I think it was the judiciary thumbing its nose at Congress and at the people of this country.

Xrlq, you have it right. The Constitution DOESN’T apply to judges. It’s just that there is an opinion now published where a judge admits it.

Really, Xrlq, I bet there are many cases where judges are guilty of any number of Constitutional deviations. Not that I think its OK, only that I think that it has happened alot more times than just this case.)

An example that comes to mind is “summary judgement”. Most people who go to court believe that they are going to have a jury decide the case (which I am still wondering where the jury was in the Schiavo case), and along comes the judge with a “summary judgemnent.” Or, if they do get the jury, here comes a “directed jury verdict”?

Regarding #12 above, I take it that in Whittmoreland, courts can now rule torture OK for the innocent as well as the convicted, with or without a jury trial??

MSM keeps contending that Terri got her (procedural) due process. What about her substantive due process? No court could possibly have determined that in time measured in hours or even days. Why wouldn’t the court have ordered her food and hydration be reestablished, then look at the facts of the case, pertinent laws, and allowed the plaintiff to amend their appeal without the life or death rush over everyone’s head?

Finally, the Appelate Court upheld all of the stuff Whittmore was smoking?? What do you think will be the legacy or legal ramificaitons of the Schiavo litigation and decisions??

Not long ago I thought aloud about how “those hectoring Congress in protest of ‘government intervention in a private matter’ need to reacquaint themselves with the fact that the judiciary is a branch of government.” Evidently, so does U.S. District…