Sure Sac- feel good about 5 Republicans that voted aganst vs. the 50 plus Dems who switched to vote for.

Can I watch????

Uh sure, scaeagles. You and Claire can even take turns trading places if you want.

Thanks for spoiling something that was gonna be really, really fun, Sac.

Actually it was 50 minus. 47 to be exact. With over 100 Dems not voting. And only 3 Dems present for the Senate voice vote. Believe my, I'm as disgusted at any spineless Dems who voted against their conscience for political reasons. But as has been mentioned, it was aggressive intervention by Jeb and his cronies that put them in that position to begin with. This case was decided in the courts 8 years ago. And for 8 years since, court after court has come to the same conclusion: She will not recover, and there is adequate reason to belive she requested not to be kept in a vegetative state (based on testimony of 3 individuals: her husband, her brother, and her sister-in-law). There has been no new evidence, no change in the opinions of the several medical experts who have examined her. All that's kept this going has been the concerted effort of activist politicians in power, using their positions to usurp the authority of the court systems.

I wanna give scaeagles mojo, but my pop-up blocker is working overtime. I never thought I'd giggle on this thread, but dangitall if I'm not.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2115123/ Another good link with a TON of good links attached. I've been going link by link through it for the past hour now.

Actually, as I read article iii, section ii of the Constitution, this is no such usurpation.

"In all other cases before mentioned, the supreme court shall have appellate juridiction, both as to law an fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the congress shall make."

Based on this, I would suggest that no such usurpation exists. What happened is that Jeb and his attorney looked for a legal and Constitutional method to assist in what they - and Terri's parents - wanted to have happen. It is within the purview of the congress to make laws regarding jurisdiction.

Finding legal and constitutional ways to get the outcome you desire is not usurpation.

If "activist judges" on the Supreme Court can be accused of usurpation, so can Jeb. If they had something of merrit, I'd agree with you. But one law that was passed and signed by Jeb has already been struck down as unconstitutional. That, if not before, should have been the final straw. Instead, they are using their power and going to extraordinary lengths to contradict the courts and to deny what has been declared over and over Terry and Michael's rights. Perhaps they are technically within their rights, it doesn't mean it's not scummy.

Leo, in all seriousness, do you not think that the Republicans in power have used this family's case as a political manuever? I'm just curious on that point.