Judge--No Immediate Ruling on Schiavo Feeding Tube

[ohio_liberal]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7254897/

U.S. District Judge James Whittemore said after the two-hour hearing that he would not make an immediate ruling, and he gave no indication on when he might act on the request.

[truebrit71]

1. Ummm...so the tube stays out??

If he waits long enough his ruling will be moot, no?

[ohio_liberal]

2. Yes, it will not be reinserted--yet

n/t

[spunky]

3. Maybe that's what he's trying to do? Just make the issue go away

by taking his time in ruling?

[Dr Ron]

5. Yes, but it would take about two weeks

For the medical aspects of removing the tube feedings, see:
http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/?view=plink&id=588

It is conceivable that a court could just decide to remain out of this by postponing action for a couple of weeks, at which point it no longer matters.

[whistle]

12. This is accurate and conforms with what I have experienced...

...with a several of close family relatives and close friends who have died from terminal illnesses. It situations where the pain was anticipated to be severe (from cancer)the patient was given the option to have pain medication.

[Walt Starr]

4. TAMPA DUERS KEEP YOUR HEADS DOWN!!!!

You never know how the religiously insane are going to react to this.

[atreides1]

6. They'll blame it on Clinton

Because if I remember correctly it was Clinton who appointed this judge.

[mother earth]

7. Amazing.....it just never stops, Clinton will be blamed forever.

[sonicx]

8. and his evil penis

[sonicx]

9. I think the judge will need a bodyguard...

[whistle]

10. That MSNBC time-line is highly edited and leaves out a lot of...

...significant details regarding the attempts by Michael Schiavo to do everything he could to allow his wife Terri to recover and the testimony and court reviews of the rulings (over 16) and the complete incompetence of the Schwindler family to do anything positive toward their daughter's care. It is a scam. Randi Rhodes time-line that she just read on her show paints a very different picture

MSM lies and deceptions.

[ohio_liberal]

11. Agreed

Go here for unbiased information

http://www.abstractappeal.com

[Jersey Devil]

13. The big hint

"I think you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that you have a substantial likelihood" of the parents' lawsuit succeeding", the judge said.
The likelihood of success is one of the two crucial elements necessary to obtain a temporary restraining order.

You must show:
1 - Irreparable harm will occur if the restraining order is not granted. - That is obvious here. And

2 - That there is a likelihood you will succeed in the litigation itself.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=1&u=/ap/20050321/ap_on_re_us/brain_damaged_woman&sid=84439559

In other words, "sure there will be irreparable harm, but you have no case

[Walt Starr]

14. My bet is he won't even rule on the merits of the case

and will declare the law unconstitutional. I believe that leaves the Schindlers with no more appeals, although the solicitor general could appeal the ruling on constiututionality to the 11th circuit court.

[ohio_liberal]

15. I hope this is the case

It opens up a can of worms otherwise.

[Jersey Devil]

16. disagree - judges don't like to rule on constitutionality if there is

another way out.

If there is no likelihood of success he can refuse to grant the restraining order without reaching any decision on the constitutionality of the law.

[Walt Starr]

17. Special circumstances require special action

The Congress usurped judicial authority. My bet is the law is struck down as unconstitutional.