I keep reading legal bloggers who suggest, in relation to the Schiavo case, that "just because Congress hasn't done it before doesn't make it unconstitutional". A truism, but not exactly compelling legal reasoning. Is this a logical next step for "never done before" legislation, now that the federal court has ruled against the parents in their effort to secure a preliminary injuction - combining extraordinary legislative intrusiveness with notion advanced by a growing number of Republicans that Congress can strip federal courts of their power to review certain constitutional issues:
For the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CREATION OF THE THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO COURT.
Pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 9 of the Constitution of the United States, Congress hereby establishes the THERESA MARIE SHIAVO Court.
SECTION 2. POWERS OF THE THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO COURT.
In responst to any petition filed by any party, the Theresa Marie Shiavo Court shall have the power to order Theresa Marie Schiavo's feeding tube reinserted.
SECTION 3. REVIEW OF DECISIONS OF THE THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO COURT.
In the event that the Theresa Marie Schiavo Court orders reinsertion of Theresa Marie Schiavo's feeding tube, there shall be no judicial review of the decision of the Theresa Marie Schiavo Court.
SECTION 4. NO PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION.
Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the creation of private court systems.