Terri Schiavo and the separation of powers

holmes writes:If it is really true that Bush signed a law allowing hospitals to unhook patients over the wishes of relatives, in order to save money, why is no one hammering on this in the media?

What's with ComCen working as tool for Bush's efforts?

The prohibition embodied in this clause is not to be strictly and narrowly construed in the context of traditional forms but is to be interpreted in accordance with the designs of the framers so as to preclude trial by legislature, a violation of the separation of powers concept.

By that, I would take it that the broader view of a bill of attainder would include acts such as this one of the Congress, in that it does amount to trial by legislature.

After a determination of the merits of a suit brought under this Act, the District Court shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

The legislation specifically and directly states that the federal judicial system shall have jurisdiction in the Terri Schiavo case AND ONLY the Terry Schiavo case and that was passed specifically for the benefit of Terry's parents. The text can be found here:

This is a clear violation of federalism and the concept of State's Rights, such a huge rallying cry of the right.

But I guess this just goes along with the current administration definition of marriage: One man, one woman, and Congress.

Section 166.046. PROCEDURE IF NOT EFFECTUATING A DIRECTIVE OR
TREATMENT DECISION. (a) If an attending physician refuses to
honor a patient's advance directive or a health care or treatment
decision made by or on behalf of a patient, the physician's refusal
shall be reviewed by an ethics or medical committee. The attending
physician may not be a member of that committee. The patient shall
be given life-sustaining treatment during the review.
        (b) The patient or the person responsible for the health
care decisions of the individual who has made the decision
regarding the directive or treatment decision:
                (1) may be given a written description of the ethics or
medical committee review process and any other policies and
procedures related to this section adopted by the health care
facility;
                (2) shall be informed of the committee review process
not less than 48 hours before the meeting called to discuss the
patient's directive, unless the time period is waived by mutual
agreement;
                (3) at the time of being so informed, shall be
provided:
                        (A) a copy of the appropriate statement set forth
in Section 166.052; and
                        (B) a copy of the registry list of health care
providers and referral groups that have volunteered their readiness
to consider accepting transfer or to assist in locating a provider
willing to accept transfer that is posted on the website maintained
by the Texas Health Care Information Council under Section 166.053;
and
                (4) is entitled to:
                        (A) attend the meeting; and
                        (B) receive a written explanation of the decision
reached during the review process.
        (c) The written explanation required by Subsection
(b)(2)(B) must be included in the patient's medical record.
        (d) If the attending physician, the patient, or the person
responsible for the health care decisions of the individual does
not agree with the decision reached during the review process under
Subsection (b), the physician shall make a reasonable effort to
transfer the patient to a physician who is willing to comply with
the directive. If the patient is a patient in a health care
facility, the facility's personnel shall assist the physician in
arranging the patient's transfer to:
                (1) another physician;
                (2) an alternative care setting within that facility;
or
                (3) another facility.
        (e) If the patient or the person responsible for the health
care decisions of the patient is requesting life-sustaining
treatment that the attending physician has decided and the review
process has affirmed is inappropriate treatment, the patient shall
be given available life-sustaining treatment pending transfer
under Subsection (d). The patient is responsible for any costs
incurred in transferring the patient to another facility. The
physician and the health care facility are not obligated to provide
life-sustaining treatment after the 10th day after the written
decision required under Subsection (b) is provided to the patient
or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the
patient unless ordered to do so under Subsection (g).
        (e-1) If during a previous admission to a facility a
patient's attending physician and the review process under
Subsection (b) have determined that life-sustaining treatment is
inappropriate, and the patient is readmitted to the same facility
within six months from the date of the decision reached during the
review process conducted upon the previous admission, Subsections
(b) through (e) need not be followed if the patient's attending
physician and a consulting physician who is a member of the ethics
or medical committee of the facility document on the patient's
readmission that the patient's condition either has not improved or
has deteriorated since the review process was conducted.
        (f) Life-sustaining treatment under this section may not be
entered in the patient's medical record as medically unnecessary
treatment until the time period provided under Subsection (e) has
expired.
        (g) At the request of the patient or the person responsible
for the health care decisions of the patient, the appropriate
district or county court shall extend the time period provided
under Subsection (e) only if the court finds, by a preponderance of
the evidence, that there is a reasonable expectation that a
physician or health care facility that will honor the patient's
directive will be found if the time extension is granted.
        (h) This section may not be construed to impose an
obligation on a facility or a home and community support services
agency licensed under Chapter 142 or similar organization that is
beyond the scope of the services or resources of the facility or
agency. This section does not apply to hospice services provided by
a home and community support services agency licensed under Chapter
142.

Section 166.039. PROCEDURE WHEN PERSON HAS NOT EXECUTED OR
ISSUED A DIRECTIVE AND IS INCOMPETENT OR INCAPABLE OF
COMMUNICATION.(b) If the patient does not have a legal guardian or an agent
under a medical power of attorney, the attending physician and one
person, if available, from one of the following categories, in the
following priority, may make a treatment decision that may include
a decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment:
                (1) the patient's spouse;
                (2) the patient's reasonably available adult children;
                (3) the patient's parents; or
                (4) the patient's nearest living relative.(c) A treatment decision made under Subsection (a) or (b)
must be based on knowledge of what the patient would desire, if
known.