Jolie Rouge

Senate Passes Legislation on Schiavo Case
By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Senate passed a bill that could prolong Terri Schiavo's life while House Republicans, stalled by Democrats, scrambled to bring enough lawmakers back to the Capitol for an emergency vote early Monday.

President Bush rushed back from his Texas ranch for a chance to sign the measure that could trigger a federal court review and a quick restoration of feeding tubes needed to keep the brain-damaged Florida woman alive.

Republican supporters said the "Palm Sunday Compromise" would protect the constitutional rights of a disabled person, and denied suggestions that they viewed the case as an opportunity to shore up support among religious conservatives ahead of next year's elections.

The House began debate on the legislation anew late Sunday, with the plan to vote just past midnight, hours after the Senate approved the bill by voice vote. "As millions of Americans observe the beginning of Holy Week this Palm Sunday we are reminded that every life has purpose and none is without meaning," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., a leader in crafting the bill.

But Rep. Jim Davis, D-Fla., said the congressional action was "a clear threat to our democracy." Congress, he said, was ignoring the constitutional separation of power and "is on the verge of telling states, courts, judges and juries that their opinions, deliberations and decisions do not matter."

The White House said the president would act as soon as the measure reaches him. "We ought to err on the side of life in a case like this," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. Asked about a bill that would cover a single person, he said, "I think most people recognize that this case involves some extraordinary circumstances."

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said the federal district court in Florida, which is open 24 hours a day, had already been informed that a petition would be filed as soon as the president signs the measure — with the presumption a judge will order that the tube be replaced. "Time is not on Terri Schiavo's side," DeLay said. "The few remaining objecting House Democrats have so far cost Mrs. Schiavo two meals already today."

Even though the legislation would pave an avenue for federal jurisdiction in the legal case, there was no way to determine in advance how or when a judge would rule — or even which judge would be assigned the case by lottery.

Lawmakers who left Washington on Friday for the two-week Easter recess had to make abrupt changes in plans, backtracking for a dramatic and politically contentious vote.

In a special session Sunday afternoon, Democrats refused to allow the bill to be passed without a roll call vote. Under House rules, such a vote could not occur before 12:01 a.m. Monday when at least 218 of the 435-member House must appear to establish a quorum. Also, because it was an expedited vote, the measure needed votes from two-thirds of those present for passage.

The House has 232 Republicans, 202 Democrats and one independent.

The legislation would give Schiavo's parents the right to file suit in federal court over the withdrawal of food and medical treatment needed to sustain the life of their daughter.

It says the court, after determining the merits of the suit, "shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights" of the woman. Injunctive relief in this case could mean the reinserting of feeding tubes. "It gives Terri Schiavo another chance," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said after the late-afternoon voice vote in a near-empty Senate chamber. "It guarantees a process to help Terri, but does not guarantee a particular outcome."

Frist also noted that the bill, responding to some Democratic objections, does not affect state assisted suicide laws or serve as a precedent for future legislation.

A Senate bill passed by the House is returned to the Senate enrollment clerk's office where it is printed on parchment and, when speed is important, driven immediately to the White House by Senate personnel. There, the White House clerk takes custody of the legislation and prepares it for the president to sign into law.

The White House made arrangements for Bush to sign the measure at any hour, although without fanfare.

Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said members scattered across the globe were being summoned back to Washington by aides to House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo.

The Democratic whip, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said his office was informing members of the vote and not discouraging them from returning to the capital. But he said the party was not counting votes and was telling members to vote their conscience on the issue.

Schiavo has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years. Her feeding tubes were removed Friday afternoon at the request of her husband, who says that his wife expressed to him before she fell ill that she did not want to be kept alive under such circumstances.

House and Senate committees at the end of the week issued subpoenas seeking to force the continuation of treatment, but that move was rejected by a Florida court.

Schiavo could linger for one or two weeks if the tube is not reinserted, as has happened twice before.

Republicans distanced themselves from a memo suggesting GOP lawmakers could use the case to appeal to Christian conservative voters and to force Democrats into a difficult vote. DeLay said he and other GOP leaders hadn't seen the memo and that he would fire any staffer who wrote such a document.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...hiavo_congress

___

The bill is S.686.

On the Net:

Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

'Don't Kick It'
If Terri Schiavo is killed, Republicans will pay a political price.
Friday, March 18, 2005

It appears we've reached the pivotal moment in the Terri Schiavo case, and it also appears our politicians, our senators and congressmen, might benefit from some observations.

In America today all big stories have three dimensions: a legal angle, a public-relations angle and a political angle. In the Schiavo case some of our politicians seem not to be fully appreciating the second and third. This is odd.

Here's both a political and a public-relations reality: The Republican Party controls the Senate, the House and the White House. The Republicans are in charge. They have the power. If they can't save this woman's life, they will face a reckoning from a sizable portion of their own base. And they will of course deserve it.

This should concentrate their minds.

So should this: America is watching. As the deadline for removal of Mrs. Schiavo's feeding tube approaches, the story has broken through as never before in the media.

There is a passionate, highly motivated and sincere group of voters and activists who care deeply about whether Terri Schiavo is allowed to live. Their reasoning, ultimately, is this: Be on the side of life. They remind me of what Winston Churchill said once when he became home secretary in charge of England's prisons. He was seated at dinner with a jabbery lady who said that if she were ever given a life sentence she'd rather die than serve it. He reared back. No, he said, always choose life! "Death's the only thing you can't get out of!"

Just so. Life is full of surprise and lightning-like lurches. The person in a coma today wakes up tomorrow and says, "Is that you, mom?" Life is unknowable. Always give it a chance to shake your soul and upend reality.

The supporters of Terri Schiavo's right to continue living have fought for her heroically, through the courts and through the legislatures. They're still fighting. They really mean it. And they have memories.

On the other side of this debate, one would assume there is an equally well organized and passionate group of organizations deeply committed to removing Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. But that's not true. There's just about no one on the other side. Or rather there is one person, a disaffected husband who insists Terri once told him she didn't want to be kept alive by extraordinary measures.

He has fought the battle to kill her with a determination that at this point seems not single-minded or passionate but strange. His former wife's parents and family are eager to care for her and do care for her, every day. He doesn't have to do a thing. His wife is not kept alive by extraordinary measures--she breathes on her own, is not on a respirator. All she needs to continue existing--and to continue being alive so that life can produce whatever miracle it may produce--is a feeding tube.

It doesn't seem a lot.

So politically this is a struggle between many serious people who really mean it and one, just one, strange-o. And the few bearded and depressed-looking academics he's drawn to his side.

It is not at all in the political interests of senators and congressmen to earn the wrath of the pro-Schiavo group and the gratitude of the anti-Schiavo husband, by doing nothing.

So let me write a sentence I never thought I'd write: Politicians, please, think of yourselves! Move to help Terri Schiavo, and no one will be mad at you, and you'll keep a human being alive. Do nothing and you reap bitterness and help someone die.

This isn't hard, is it?

At the heart of the case at this point is a question: Is Terri Schiavo brain-dead? That is, is remedy, healing, physiologically impossible?

No. Oddly enough anyone who sees the film and tape of her can see that her brain tells her lungs to breathe, that she can open her eyes, that she seems to respond at times and to some degree to her family. She can laugh. (I heard it this morning on the news. It's a childlike chuckle.) In the language of computers she appears not to be a broken hard drive but a computer in deep hibernation. She looks like one of those coma cases that wind up in the news because the patient, for no clear reason, snaps to and returns to life and says, "Is it 1983? Is there still McDonald's? Can I have a burger?"

Again, life is mysterious. Medicine is full of happenings and events that leave brilliant doctors scratching their heads.

But in the end, it comes down to this: Why kill her? What is gained? What is good about it? Ronald Reagan used to say, in the early days of the abortion debate, when people would argue that the fetus may not really be a person, he'd say, "Well, if you come across a paper bag in the gutter and it seems something's in it and you don't know if it's alive, you don't kick it, do you?"

No, you don't.

So Congress: don't kick it. Let her live. Hard cases make bad law, but let her live. Precedents can begin to cascade, special pleas can become a flood, but let her live. Because she's human, and you're human.


A final note to the Republican leadership in the House and Senate: You have to pull out all the stops. You have to run over your chairmen if they're being obstructionist for this niggling reason and that. Run over their egos, run past their fatigue. You have to win on this. If you don't, you can't imagine how much you're going to lose. And from people who have faith in you.
Bill Frist and Tom DeLay and Jim Sensenbrenner and Denny Hastert and all the rest would be better off risking looking ridiculous and flying down to Florida, standing outside Terri Schiavo's room and physically restraining the poor harassed staff who may be told soon to remove her feeding tube, than standing by in Washington, helpless and tied in legislative knots, and doing nothing.

Issue whatever subpoena, call whatever witnesses, pass whatever emergency bill, but don't let this woman die.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/column.../?id=110006442

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

janelle

David Hall, of Fort Worth, Texas, right, protests Sunday outside the Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park, Fla., , where Terri Schiavo is a patient

House passes Schiavo legislation
Parents hope bill will force return of daughter's feeding tubeThe Associated Press
Updated: 12:54 a.m. ET March 21, 2005WASHINGTON - Congress approved emergency legislation early Monday to let Terri Schiavo's parents ask a federal judge to prolong their daughter's life, capping days of emotional debate over who should decide life and death.



President Bush waited at the White House to sign the measure permitting a federal review of the case, which could trigger the reinsertion of feeding tubes needed to keep the brain-damaged Florida woman alive.

The House passed the bill on a 203-58 vote after calling lawmakers back for an emergency Sunday session for debate that stretched past midnight.

The Senate approved the bill Sunday by voice vote.



Republican supporters said the "Palm Sunday Compromise" seeks to protect the constitutional rights of a disabled person and rejected suggestions that political motives lay behind the last-minute maneuver.

"When a person's intentions regarding whether to receive lifesaving treatment are unclear, the responsibility of a compassionate nation is to affirm that person's right to life," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis. "In our deeds and public actions, we must build a culture of life that welcomes and defends all human life."

Many Democrats who opposed the bill said the congressional vote placed lawmakers in the middle of issues best left to state courts and family members.

"Today, congressional leaders are trying to appoint Congress as a judge and jury," said Rep. Jim Davis, D-Fla. "If we do not draw the line in the sand today, there is no limit to what democratic principles this Congress will ignore or what liberties they may trample on next."

House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. and others rejected the description of the brain-damaged woman as persisting in a "vegetative" state.

"She laughs, she cries and she smiles with those around her. She is aware of her surroundings and is responsive to them," he said. "This is a woman who deserves a chance at life and not a death sentence of starvation and dehydration."

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., rejected the notion that elected lawmakers could accurately diagnose her condition.

"The caption tonight ought to be: We're not doctors, we just play them on C-SPAN," he said.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said the federal district court in Florida, which is open 24 hours a day, had already been informed that a petition would be filed as soon as the president signs the measure -- with the presumption a judge will order that the tube be replaced.

‘Two meals already’
"Time is not on Terri Schiavo's side," DeLay said. "The few remaining objecting House Democrats have so far cost Mrs. Schiavo two meals already today."



Even though the legislation paved an avenue for federal jurisdiction in the legal case, there was no way to determine in advance how or when a judge would rule -- or even which judge would be assigned the case by lottery.

Lawmakers who left Washington on Friday for the two-week Easter recess had to make abrupt changes in plans, backtracking for a dramatic and politically contentious vote.

In a special session Sunday afternoon, Democrats refused to allow the bill to be passed without a roll call vote.

That meant a vote could not occur before 12:01 a.m. Monday -- the start of a new legislative day. Still, the measure was handled on an expedited calendar that required a two-thirds majority to pass.

The House has 232 Republicans, 202 Democrats and one independent.

Right to sue
The legislation would give Schiavo's parents the right to file suit in federal court over the withdrawal of food and medical treatment needed to sustain the life of their daughter.



It says the court, after determining the merits of the suit, "shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights" of the woman. Injunctive relief in this case could mean the reinserting of feeding tubes.

"It gives Terri Schiavo another chance," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said after the late-afternoon voice vote in a near-empty Senate chamber. "It guarantees a process to help Terri, but does not guarantee a particular outcome."

Frist also noted that the bill, responding to some Democratic objections, does not affect state assisted suicide laws or serve as a precedent for future legislation.

A Senate bill passed by the House is returned to the Senate enrollment clerk's office where it is printed on parchment and, when speed is important, driven immediately to the White House by Senate personnel. There, the White House clerk takes custody of the legislation and prepares it for the president to sign into law.

The White House made arrangements for Bush to sign the measure at any hour, although without fanfare.


Winston Luzier / Reuters
Terri Schiavo's sister Suzanne Vitadamo, left, mother Mary Schindler, and Brother Hilery McGee of the Franciscan Brothers of Peace of St. Paul, Minn., address a crowd in Pinellas Park, Fla., on Saturday before visiting Terri, who had her feeding tube removed Friday.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Democratic whip, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said his office was telling members to vote their conscience on the issue and there was considerable Democratic support for the bill.

Schiavo has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years. Her feeding tubes were removed Friday afternoon at the request of her husband, who says that his wife expressed to him before she fell ill that she did not want to be kept alive under such circumstances.

House and Senate committees at the end of the week issued subpoenas seeking to force the continuation of treatment, but that move was rejected by a Florida court.

Schiavo could linger for one or two weeks if the tube is not reinserted, as has happened twice before.

Republicans distanced themselves from a memo suggesting GOP lawmakers could use the case to appeal to Christian conservative voters and to force Democrats into a difficult vote. DeLay said he and other GOP leaders hadn't seen the memo and that he would fire any staffer who wrote such a document.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

janelle

Frist views video, disputes Schiavo diagnosis
Senator's comments raises eyebrows in medical, political circlesBy Charles Babington

Updated: 4:41 a.m. ET March 19, 2005WASHINGTON - Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), a renowned heart surgeon before becoming Senate majority leader, went to the floor late Thursday night for the second time in 12 hours to argue that Florida doctors had erred in saying Terri Schiavo is in a "persistent vegetative state."



"I question it based on a review of the video footage which I spent an hour or so looking at last night in my office," he said in a lengthy speech in which he quoted medical texts and standards. "She certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli."

His comments raised eyebrows in medical and political circles alike. It is not every day that a high-profile physician relies on family videotapes to challenge the diagnosis of doctors who examined a severely brain-damaged patient in person. Democrats were quick to note that Frist was getting rave reviews from conservative activists who will play a major role in the 2008 presidential primaries he is weighing.


In addition to the speeches, Frist backed a Senate strategy that threatens criminal sanctions against anyone who keeps Schiavo from attending a Washington hearing next week, to which she and her husband Michael Schiavo were invited early yesterday.

"I suspect that Senator Frist has his eye more on the Iowa caucus than the Hippocratic Oath," said Marshall Wittmann, a senior fellow at the Democratic Leadership Council and former GOP Senate staffer. "This is clearly the politics of the Republican base."

Republican pollster Anthony Fabrizio said Frist will doubtlessly win applause from staunch opponents of euthanasia and abortion, but he may receive a cooler reception from advocates of states' rights and limited federal government. "If you want to confirm your bona fides" with the former group, Fabrizio said, "this is a good way to do it. But while you're pleasing one segment of the party, you may be setting yourself up for trouble with conservatives who say 'we don't want more federal control over this stuff.' "

Medical specialists question Frist's challenges
Some medical professionals questioned the appropriateness of Frist challenging court-approved doctors who have treated Schiavo. Laurie Zoloth, director of bioethics for the Center for Genetic Medicine at Northwestern University, said she was surprised to hear Frist weigh in, given that he has not examined Schiavo. "It is extremely unusual -- and by a non-neurologist, I might add," Zoloth said in an interview.

Were Frist rendering an official medical judgment, she said, relying on an "amateur video" could raise liability issues. After 15 years, "there should be no confusion about the medical data, and that's what was so surprising to me about Dr. Frist disagreeing about her medical status," Zoloth said.

It is not the first time that Frist has created a stir in medical and political circles. In December, on ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos," he repeatedly declined to say whether he thought HIV-AIDS could be transmitted through tears or sweat. A much-disputed federal education program championed by some conservative groups had suggested that such transmissions occur.

After numerous challenges by Stephanopoulos, Frist said that "it would be very hard" for someone to contract AIDS via tears or sweat. The Web site of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says: "Contact with saliva, tears, or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV."

Aides: Frist's interests not political
Frist's aides say political considerations played no role in his actions regarding Schiavo. "His interest in this was sparked solely as a medical and human rights matter," said Eric M. Ueland, his chief of staff. "It's time for people to take off the 2008 rose-colored glasses and see Bill Frist for who he really is."

Conservative activist Gary Bauer, who made a 2000 presidential bid, praised Frist's role in the Schiavo case and said he would be surprised if conservatives of any stripe take offense. "I don't think there's any danger on the limited-role-of-federal-government argument," Bauer said, "because protecting life is an issue that transcends federalism."

Still Bauer said, Frist's intervention carries political risks because "the general public has been told she's in a vegetative state," and voters may view his actions as inappropriate meddling. "But I think he and others have been so courageous about this" that people will see them as "willing to go to the mat for one handicapped individual in Florida."

Democratic strategist Jim Jordan offered a much stronger assessment. "It's quackery," he said. "It'd be hilarious if it weren't so grotesque, how his presidential ambitions and pandering to the right wing is clashing with his life's work."

Staff writer Shailagh Murray contributed to this report.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

KarlaJorge

Are you a doctor that has examined her? You nor I can be sure of this. What we debate is that she has been restricted of so many things, especially therapy that could help her, that makes us think that Michael Schiavo's decisions are NOT in her best interest. And that is a fact that doesn't need to be diagnosed by a doctor, it can be seen so very clearly, by all the things he has denied her.

How can she get better if she has not been given that chance, What treatments??!! the treatments that have been denied to her, what drug??!! the doctors have not been allowed to care for her so who knows what she has been missing.

And sure the mother has no legal standing, would it be right if the husband was a criminal, serial killer, whatever type of the worst person in this world, would it be fine to just let him take those decisions. We are talking a specific case here, not just a daily basis regular family ordeal. With so many strange misterious things that have come out to the light about who really Michael Schiavo is, and how he treated her prior to her collapse, and some desisions he has taken with her in her state and condition like denying therapy, denying her family to see her, denying mediacl treatments that she needed for infections, etc. I mean yeah we don't know if all is true, but just being possible it's enough to NOT TRUST HIM.

__________________
MY FSOT LIST
MY HALLOWEEN FSOT
MY COUPONS FSOT
NEED TO SEE MY FEEDBACK?

YNKYH8R

You're forgetting one thing.....
SHE DIDN"T WANT TO LIVE LIKE THIS!!!!

__________________
ARMPIT

YNKYH8R

How can Michaels actions not be in her best interest if this is what she wnated? The courts have found no reason to take away spousal rights. The state courts agree with Michael, all appeals have been shot down. What more do you want? What can anyone possibley say that could justify taking away Terri's right to die or Michael's spousal rights?

__________________
ARMPIT

dangerousfem

Says who?? The one person who has wanted her to die this whole time? The only person in her life to hear her say it? The one person who for seven years FORGOT that she had said it?

sorry not proof to me.. and seems not enough prove to alot of others.

__________________


I ain't from the south... but I got here as fast as I could!

tigger4

You have to love our government. We are at war that is not going as well as they had hoped, we have a record deficit that just keeps getting worse, and our Congress and Senate are sticking their noses into a private citizens life. Whatever happened to the Republicans saying we don't need BIG government. Sounds awfully Big to me.

excuseme

Seems like she'd be dead if she was in Texas. No outrage at this Republican passed law. Google Sun Hudson to witness the hypocrisy.

_____________________________

Baby born with fatal defect dies after removal from life support
By LEIGH HOPPER
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open and smacked his lips, according to his mother.

ADVERTISEMENT

Then at 2 p.m. today, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his Sept. 25 birth. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died.

"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months .... They made a terrible mistake."

Sun's death marks the first time a hospital has been allowed by a U.S. judge to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts. A similar case involving a 68-year-old man in a chronic vegetative state at another Houston hospital is before a court now.

"This isn't murder. It's mercy and it's appropriate to be merciful in that way. It's not killing, it's stopping pointless treatment," said William Winslade, a bioethicist and lawyer who is a professor at the Institute for the Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. "It's sad this (Sun Hudson case) dragged on for so long. It's always sad when an infant dies. We all feel it's unfair, that a child doesn't have a chance to develop and thrive."

The hospital's description of Sun — that he was motionless and sedated for comfort — has differed sharply from the mother's. Since February, the hospital has blocked the media from accepting Hudson's invitation to see the baby in the neonatal intensive care unit, citing patient privacy concerns.

"I wanted y'all to see my son for yourself," Hudson told reporters. "So you could see he was actually moving around. He was conscious."

On Feb. 16, Harris County Probate Court Judge William C. McCulloch made the landmark decision to lift restrictions preventing Texas Children's from discontinuing care. However, an emergency appeal by Hudson's attorney, Mario Caballero, and a procedural error on McCulloch's part prevented the hospital from acting for four more weeks.

Texas law allows hospitals can discontinue life sustaining care, even if patient family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient.

Texas Children's said it contacted 40 facilities with newborn intensive care units, but none would accept Sun. Without legal delays, Sun's care would have ended Nov. 28.

Sun was born with a fatal form of dwarfism characterized by short arms, short legs and lungs too tiny to sustain his body, doctors said. Nearly all babies born with the incurable condition, often diagnosed in utero, die shortly after birth, genetic counselors say.

Sun was delivered full-term at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, but Hudson, 33, said she had no prenatal care during which his condition might have been discovered. He was put on a ventilator while doctors figured out what was wrong with him, and Hudson refused when doctors recommending withdrawing treatment.

"From the time Sun was born ... he was on life support because his chest cavity and lungs could not grow and develop the capacity to support his body. He was slowly suffocating to death," Texas Children's said in a statement today.

Texas Children's contended that continuing care for Sun was medically inappropriate, prolonged suffering and violated physician ethics. Hudson argued her son just needed more time to grow and be weaned from the ventilator.

Another case involving a patient on life support — a 68-year man in a chronic vegetative state whose family wants to stop St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital from turning off his ventilator — was supposed to be heard today by the Houston-based 1st Court of Appeals.

But in a procedural switch, the case was transferred today to the 14th Court of Appeals, which promptly issued a temporary injunction ordering St. Luke's not to remove the man's life support, much as the 1st Court did Saturday. No hearing date has been set.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory...olitan/3084934

YNKYH8R

See I knew you'd get it...

__________________
ARMPIT