the Schiavo saga continues

Federal district judge James Whittemore entered an order today (Monday, March 22), faster than Congress acted but with greater deliberation, denying relief to the parents of Terri Schiavo. I am sorry to report that he accepted the argument that he had jurisdiction to hear this one case, of the hundreds if not thousands of other cases involving the right to die, because Congress told him he had jurisdiction. He ducked that issue. He ducked all issues as to the constitutionality of the act, which might have included the Equal Protection Clause. But he seized upon the first and most important issue in any suit for what is called "temporary injunctive relief," which is whether the moving party (in this case, her parents) can show that they have a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. That means likely or probable, not certain, success.

Schiavo's parents attacked the procedures followed by state court judge George Greer, identifying five legal issues. You can read the five issues and Judge Whittemore's discussion of them here: http://www2.sptimes.com/pdfs/schiavodenyingtro.pdf . He found their contentions without merit. The phrase "without merit" appears several times in the order. Ultimately, he paid a subtle compliment to Judge Greer, whether he meant to or not, by denying the restraining order because "this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it."

Memo to Congress, Representative DeLay, and President George W. Bush: You can lead a horse to water, and shove his head into it, but you can't make him drink it. Thank God for the independence of the federal judiciary. I don't mean the Supremes, but the hard-working district court judges who deal with real cases involving real people every working day of the year.