Leaving the Democrats

[vern_humphrey]

miguel:

How about not enforcing their decisions?

How could Jeb Bush do that? The judge ordered her husband (the man who WANTED her dead) to kill her. There was no “enforcement” involved.

Now if he had ordered the PARENTS (who didn’t want her dead) to remove the feeding tube, THAT would have had to be enforced.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Richardols:

Being armed and using arms are two different things. Cops make thousands of arrests without ever drawing a gun.

Notice that no one has suggested Bush send the staff of the Department of Motor Vehicles to halt the killing. The two organizations named are armed organizations.

 

[miguel]

Richardols:

The judge followed proper legal procedure. No one has challenged that. And, his action was upheld by an appellate court - of mostly Republicans, BTW.

Even if I personally can’t cite the statute, he certainly had the law on his side. Though I fault J. Bush for what he didn’t do, I know that Bush was aware that Greer was acting within the law.

If you can’t cite the statute, why are you so adamant that he was acting legally? We have a written Constitution. Judges and elected officials take an oath to uphold it. If there are laws on the books against murder, judges should not be able to circumvent them. Inventing stuff as they go along is not legal in my view.

 

[miguel]

Richardols:

It has the force of law. Laws don’t have to be statutory, e.g. the common law.

And under our Constitutional system, which branch has the authority to enforce (or not) judicial decisions?

 

[Richardols]

miguel:

If you can’t cite the statute, why are you so adamant that he was acting legally?

If the appellate courts believed he was acting legally and the Governor also so believed, it’s good enough for me.

We have a written Constitution. Judges and elected officials take an oath to uphold it. If there are laws on the books against murder, judges should not be able to circumvent them. Inventing stuff as they go along is not legal in my view.

Good. Judge Greer wasn’t making things up as he went along.

I think we’ve hijacked this thread long enough. Let’s go back to “Leaving the Democrats.”

 

[miguel]

vern humphrey:

How could Jeb Bush do that? The judge ordered her husband (the man who WANTED her dead) to kill her. There was no “enforcement” involved.

Now if he had ordered the PARENTS (who didn’t want her dead) to remove the feeding tube, THAT would have had to be enforced.

But where does the enforcement power Constitutionally reside? In the judicial branch or the executive? How can a judge order anything? I know it happens. But why? That’s not our Constitution.

And if I remember right, there was a cop on site to prevent any drinks of water from being given to her by the parents. Who ordered this? Greer? And why is are the cops taking orders from judges. Constitutionally, they’re part of the executive branch.

 

[rlg94086]

vern humphrey:

Notice that no one has suggested Bush send the staff of the Department of Motor Vehicles to halt the killing. The two organizations named are armed organizations.

DMV? That would have taken forever. First you have to wait in line to get a number, then wait for you number to be called…

 

[miguel]

rlg94086:

I’m not proposing it - it’s antithetical to my belief in our Constitution.

I disagree with your characterization of the Schiavo case being unique with respect to the governor’s answering to a higher law. I personally believe Gov. Bush did everything within his role as governor.

You say he should have “placed himself above state law and followed a higher law”. Logically, this should extend to any case where he feels he his following a higher law. I guess if it’s not a governor’s place, than the President should place himself above federal law, follow a higher law, and close all abortion clinics. Would that be okay?

Federal law includes a law prohibiting partial birth abortion. It was passed by an act of Congress and signed into law by the President. Should it be enforced? Or should we let the Court thwart the law of the land?

 

[vern_humphrey]

miguel:

But where does the enforcement power Constitutionally reside? In the judicial branch or the executive? How can a judge order anything? I know it happens. But why? That’s not our Constitution.

Enforcement is in the executive branch at the federal level – but different states have different constitutions.

In this case it doesn’t matter – enforcement was not an issue. The man ordered to kill her was the man who wanted to kill her.

 

[rlg94086]

miguel:

Federal law includes a law prohibiting partial birth abortion. It was passed by an act of Congress and signed into law by the President. Should it be enforced? Or should we let the Court thwart the law of the land?

Of course it should be enforced. Do you have an example of where it wasn’t enforced?

 

[miguel]

vern humphrey:

Enforcement is in the executive branch at the federal level – but different states have different constitutions.

In this case it doesn’t matter – enforcement was not an issue. The man ordered to kill her was the man who wanted to kill her.

So we need to understand where enforcement constitutionally belongs in Florida and if Florida judges can order the enforcement of their decisions.

 

[miguel]

rlg94086:

Of course it should be enforced. Do you have an example of where it wasn’t enforced?

I do not know of a specific example of any partial birth abortions that have been prevented by this law or of any prosecutions of persons who have broken it. The law is currently in limbo because of at least 3 court decisions around the country. And I don’t think that should have been allowed.

 

[rlg94086]

miguel:

I do not know of a specific example of any partial birth abortions that have been prevented by this law or of any prosecutions of persons who have broken it. The law is currently in limbo because of at least 3 court decisions around the country. And I don’t think that should have been allowed.

Obviously, a partial birth abortion must have been prevented, or no case would have been brought to court.

 

[vern_humphrey]

miguel:

So we need to understand where enforcement constitutionally belongs in Florida and if Florida judges can order the enforcement of their decisions.

There’s no “enforcement” to it – the order was given to the man who WANTED her killed, and he carried it out.

Rulings and laws only need to be enforced when someone is ordered to do something he DOESN’T want to do.

 

[miguel]

rlg94086:

Obviously, a partial birth abortion must have been prevented, or no case would have been brought to court.

Possibly, but that is not obvious to me. The constitutionality of the law was challenged by the usual suspects. And it’s enforcement is being held up.

This is similar to Californians passing proposition 187. It was a state law that was never enforced because it was challenged in Federal court. And here again a federal district judge thwarted majority rule.

 

[miguel]

vern humphrey:

There’s no “enforcement” to it – the order was given to the man who WANTED her killed, and he carried it out.

Rulings and laws only need to be enforced when someone is ordered to do something he DOESN’T want to do.

There was enforcement here. The parents were kept away and prevented from feeding her or giving her anything to drink. A cop was in her room for that purpose. What branch of government was he working for?

 

[vern_humphrey]

miguel:

There was enforcement here. The parents were kept away and prevented from feeding her or giving her anything to drink. A cop was in her room for that purpose. What branch of government was he working for?

The husband enforced it – he requested the local authorities keep them away.

Now, what should anyone else have done – tried to throw him out?

 

[rlg94086]

miguel:

Possibly, but that is not obvious to me. The constitutionality of the law was challenged by the usual suspects. And it’s enforcement is being held up.

This is similar to Californians passing proposition 187. It was a state law that was never enforced because it was challenged in Federal court. And here again a federal district judge thwarted majority rule.

You must have standing to bring a case to court in my understanding. Either someone performed a partial birth abortion and is being tried for it (I doubt it), or someone was refused an abortion and they are suing (more than likely). I’m not a legal expert, and I don’t know the nature of the 3 cases. If you do, please enlighten me; otherwise, it doesn’t make sense for us to discuss them.

In regards to Prop 187. This is terrible, but if a federal judge rules a state law unconstitutional, it does overturn the law. I didn’t know it was overturned by the court. If so, I’m quite certain the judge ruled incorrectly (again, my opinion). This is a problem in our country at this time.

 

[miguel]

rlg94086:

You must have standing to bring a case to court in my understanding.

This is generally true, but there are exceptions. And I’m not an expert either.

rlg94086:

Either someone performed a partial birth abortion and is being tried for it (I doubt it), or someone was refused an abortion and they are suing (more than likely). I’m not a legal expert, and I don’t know what the nature of the 3 cases. If you do, please enlighten me; otherwise, it doesn’t make sense for us to discuss them.

The details of these cases are not fresh in my mind.

rlg94086:

In regards to Prop 187. This is terrible, but if a federal judge rules a state law unconstitutional, it does overturn the law. I didn’t know it was overturned by the court. If so, I’m quite certain the judge ruled incorrectly (again, my opinion). This is a problem in our country at this time.

You bet it’s a problem. It was called unconstitutional because it was falsely claimed that California was interfering with the federal prerogative of enforcing immigration laws. Not true. Californians simply voted to stop using state money to provide benefits for illegals. How is it Constitutional for a federal district judge to tell a state how to spend its own money? Wilson was appealing the decision. But Davis dropped the appeal when he got in.

 

[miguel]

vern humphrey:

The husband enforced it – he requested the local authorities keep them away.

Now, what should anyone else have done – tried to throw him out?

So if you want to kill your wife, do you think the authorities should help you if a judge “orders” them to? I don’t. I don’t think the authorities should ever help a husband kill his wife. And if they are part of the executive branch, I don’t think they should respond to court orders without the assent of the executive branch. And if they are part of the judicial branch, I think that’s dangerous.