I’ve Got a Bad Feeling About This…

You know, after running a blog site for a while, readers start to keep you honest. I’ve had several people ask me why I haven’t commented on the Terri Schiavo case yet. I had been waiting to see what Congress was going to do once they inserted themselves in to this story. Honestly, that’s when it became more important to me.
Now, I know how that sounds. People are probably wondering why the Terri Schiavo’s plight wasn’t important to me. Certainly there were and continue to be several hot-button issues at the core of this debate. I just haven’t been able to bring myself to comment on it before now.
I’ve felt very conflicted over this topic for months. While I dearly wish that there was something that would allow her parents to be named her guardian, I understand the legality that surrounds this issue as much as I can—and that’s enough to know that Terri’s husband, Michael, likely has the prevailing legal argument. I also know that Terri’s right to due process set forth under the Constitution has not been violated and that the State of Florida hasn’t violated any laws in making its ruling.
Yet it doesn’t help me rationalize the fact that Terri Schiavo now sits in a room somewhere in Florida, starving to death. That’s what happens when they remove your feeding tube. People want to disguise this issue by calling it a “right to die” case, but it’s not, really. It’s about the right to starve to death, so they might as well call it what it is and cut through the BS.
But I keep coming back to the law of the land—and it hasn’t been violated. I don’t like it, but there has been due process. It’s not the result a lot of people wanted but it is the result of our rights and laws. That last part is the thing that sticks in my craw.
Sunday night, Congress passed legislation to allow federal judicial review of cases like Terri Schiavo’s. I’ve heard some argue that they’re upset that Congress has inserted themselves into this, arguing that it is unconstitutional, but is it?
I’m no expert certainly, but in addition to the Bill of Rights the Constitution also contains Article III which, from what I hear and near as I can figure myself, gives Congress the power of determining the jurisdiction of the federal courts. That’s exactly what Congress did.
Writing today on National Review Online, Mark Levin, author of Men In Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America, defended Congress’ actions:

RIGHTS AND SCHIAVO [Mark R. Levin]
The right to live, or more specifically, the right not to be killed, is a fundamental right. And it’s a right recognized in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence. So ingrained in our society is the notion of life, that the 8th Amendment prohibits “cruel and usual punishment” (even short of death) and the 14th Amendment prohibits states from depriving any person of life without due process of law. This has nothing to do with federalism, unless you ignore the 8th and 14th Amendments. (Unlike the Left, that contorts the 14th Amendment, I’m recognizing its literal meaning.)
What really offends the Left is Congress asserting its constitutional power over a court, and not in service to the liberal agenda. Article III specifically empowers Congress to determine the jurisdiction of the federal courts, which is all it did today. It authorized a federal court to determine whether Terri Schiavo’s due process rights and the right not be subject to cruel and unusual punishment were properly protected by a state court. In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decided on its own that abortion was a federal question, not to be left to the states, without any constitutional basis whatsoever. It preempted every state court and legislature (and Congress, for that matter). And the Left celebrates this decision.
As for why Congress is acting here, as opposed to any other case with overlapping issues, I suppose that question could be asked whenever Congress acts. The Schiavo case has risen to national attention. So, Congress is responding. That’s how representative government works. The week after the Titanic sank, Congress held its first hearings to change U.S. maritime laws.
We must not allow the Left to define the terms of this debate. It is willing to make almost any argument to protect the supremacy of the courts. And even though Congress here is instructing the federal courts to review the case, the Left objects to any congressional exercise of constitutional authority over the judiciary. As Rep. Jim Moran (Dem, VA) said yesterday, “The judiciary has spoken.”
Yet I can’t shake that feeling that this is just because a bunch of people don’t like the way a legal proceeding turned out. The actions of Congress don’t mean the feeding tube will be re-inserted.

I know that. I love the Constitution. I understand the law. I know she’s not a “vegetable” or on life-support. I just really don’t like where this case ends up.
I talked to my sister tonight and I told her that if I were ever in Terri’s situation, she should know I would never want to live like that. I’ll probably get my living will done, too, as everyone should do.
It still doesn’t change the fact that even though the law was followed, the outcome leaves me sick to my stomach.
William Smith
ConservativeBlogger.com