Ask the Right Question, Get the Right Answer
The Democrats and their allies aren't just seeking a foothold to attack Judge Roberts on "beginning of life" (i.e. abortion) issues. They're also after the end of life issues, as demonstrated by this report in The New York Times.
As The Times reports it, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) was poking around to see if Roberts thinks Congress should have intervened in the Terri Schiavo matter -- according to Wyden's own account, he asked "whether it was constitutional for Congress to intervene in an end-of-life case with a specific remedy." Roberts' answer to the question was just fine -- one with which every conservative can agree: "I am concerned with judicial independence. Congress can prescribe standards, but when Congress starts to act like a court and prescribe particular remedies in particular cases, Congress has overstepped its bounds."
But it's worth noting that the answer doesn't actually respond to any issue that was associated with Congressional intervention in the Terri Schiavo case.
There, Congress didn't prescribe a remedy. As this MSNBC piece (written at the time) acknowledges, the Congressional legislation merely "gave federal courts authority to fully review her case." No remedies were ordered by Congress -- nor, under separation of powers doctrines, would Congress have the ability to force any court to issue any remedy in a particular case anyway.
When The Times writes that Wyden "made clear he was displeased with Congress's effort to force the federal judiciary to overturn a court order withdrawing her feeding tube" -- well, once again, it's misstating the facts in order to make Republicans look bad. Congress didn't order removal of the tube, it merely gave federal courts jurisdiction to look at the case for themselves. . . so that a federal judge could decide what remedy was appropriate.
The left shouldn't be able to get away with reporting the judge's answers to mere hypotheticals as reflecting his opinion on specific cases. Nor should it be allowed to rewrite the history of Congressional action in the Schiavo case as it rewrote the history of the Thomas-Hill hearings.
As The Times reports it, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) was poking around to see if Roberts thinks Congress should have intervened in the Terri Schiavo matter -- according to Wyden's own account, he asked "whether it was constitutional for Congress to intervene in an end-of-life case with a specific remedy." Roberts' answer to the question was just fine -- one with which every conservative can agree: "I am concerned with judicial independence. Congress can prescribe standards, but when Congress starts to act like a court and prescribe particular remedies in particular cases, Congress has overstepped its bounds."
But it's worth noting that the answer doesn't actually respond to any issue that was associated with Congressional intervention in the Terri Schiavo case.
There, Congress didn't prescribe a remedy. As this MSNBC piece (written at the time) acknowledges, the Congressional legislation merely "gave federal courts authority to fully review her case." No remedies were ordered by Congress -- nor, under separation of powers doctrines, would Congress have the ability to force any court to issue any remedy in a particular case anyway.
When The Times writes that Wyden "made clear he was displeased with Congress's effort to force the federal judiciary to overturn a court order withdrawing her feeding tube" -- well, once again, it's misstating the facts in order to make Republicans look bad. Congress didn't order removal of the tube, it merely gave federal courts jurisdiction to look at the case for themselves. . . so that a federal judge could decide what remedy was appropriate.
The left shouldn't be able to get away with reporting the judge's answers to mere hypotheticals as reflecting his opinion on specific cases. Nor should it be allowed to rewrite the history of Congressional action in the Schiavo case as it rewrote the history of the Thomas-Hill hearings.
posted by LadybugUSA at 9:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home