Good Findlaw Article on GOP violation of Separation of Powers re: Schiavo

[Sandpiper]

Regarding the Florida Legislature's similar efforts

The Florida Legislation Violates the Principle of Separation of Powers

Even beyond these constitutional infirmities, there are other defects in the Florida law. For instance, Article I, Section 10 of the federal Constitution prohibits each state from enacting any "bill of attainder"--a legislative act that imposes punishment on one or more people without the benefit of a trial.

A bill of attainder is the ultimate violation of both due process and separation of powers. That is because it substitutes a political process for the adjudication of a particular controversy by a court committed to making its decision based on the law, as the court best understands it. The due process violation is the deprivation of the court hearing. The separation of powers violation is the legislature's usurpation of the judiciary's authority to resolve individual cases.

The Florida law directed at Schiavo is not, as a technical matter, a bill of attainder. The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted that term to apply only to laws that are designed to punish particular individuals, and the Florida legislators no doubt believed that they were bestowing a benefit on Schiavo by permitting the Governor to extend her life.

Yet certainly the spirit of the Bill of Attainder Clause is violated when a legislature and governor assume for themselves a judicial function--acting to override a judicial decision in a particular case.

Indeed, that was the holding of the United States Supreme Court in the 1995 case of Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. There, in an opinion by Justice Scalia, the Court invalidated an effort by Congress to direct the courts to reopen final judgments.

<snip>

http://writ.corporate.findlaw.com/dorf/20031029.html

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Barney Frank was pretty eloquent on that today.

[flordehinojos]

5. Yes. I also liked Debi Wasserman-Schultz who told a reporter,

"we are not Gods--we are lawmakers. The decision of when or whether a tube should be taken out is up to the relatives of the dying person. My constituents didn't send me here to decide whether they should have a tube kept or taken out of them. They are terrified at the prospect ..." Wasserman-Schultz has guts. That is something that democrats are lacking in right (with a couple of exceptions like Ted Kennedy and Senator Byrd. The rest are just rubber stamping this macabre bush administration).

.

[BrklynLiberal]

7. She was very gutsy and spunky. I liked her very much.

[pinkpops]

2. Yes, and what if another party goes to court and wants equal

treatment under the law? If the law was passed for only one individual, does that not deprive other individuals of equal treatment?

[Sandpiper]

3. That is precisely why Congress can't draft laws for individuals

Congress has the authority to draft broad based legislation.

It is then the function of the courts to interpret it on an individual basis.

[DearAbby]

4. They must be aware of these but are truly grandstanding On Palm Sunday

for their base...disgusting

[grasswire]

6. oh....

...you mean like what happened when the U.S. Supreme Court twisted the formerly immutable Rule of Law to force Florida to stop counting votes in 2000? That was an exception for a person's privilege, and the ruling was written to insure there was no precedent from the decision.