Republicans flex subpoena muscle
By BILL ADAIR and STEPHEN NOHLGREN
Published March 19, 2005
By using subpoenas in an attempt to keep Terri Schiavo alive, congressional Republicans flexed extraordinary political muscle.
Two congressional committees plan to hold hearings about Schiavo and the House chairman says the subpoenas are needed to "preserve evidence."
But it was clear Friday that congressional leaders had another motive: to get her feeding tube reinserted until Congress or a court can take more permanent action that keeps her alive.
Congress has long had the power to subpoena witnesses to conduct investigations and carry out its oversight responsibilities.
But law professors said that authority has rarely been used for anything except investigations and hearings. They could recall only one similar subpoena, issued in 2000 for Elian Gonzalez, a Cuban boy who was caught in a custody fight between his father, a Cuban citizen, and Miami relatives who wanted the boy to remain in the United States.
In that case, Rep. Dan Burton, the Republican chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, subpoenaed the boy to prevent him from being returned to Cuba. But the boy's Miami relatives won temporary legal custody that rendered the subpoena unnecessary. U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno ultimately ordered Elian returned to his father in Cuba.
On Friday, House Republicans said they planned to hold a hearing on March 25 at the Pinellas Park hospice where she is staying. They subpoenaed Schiavo, her husband, Michael, and her doctors.
The subpoenas specified that the witnesses bring to the hearing "all medical and other equipment that provides nutrition and hydration ... in its current and continuing state of operations."
Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., who chairs the Government Reform Committee, said it was "a legitimate legislative inquiry."
But other House Republicans indicated they hoped the maneuver would keep her alive. "Right now, murder is being committed against a defenseless American citizen in Florida," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. "Terri Schiavo's feeding tube should be immediately replaced, and Congress will continue working to explore ways to save her."
The Senate took similar action by requesting that Schiavo and her husband testify at a separate hearing scheduled for Monday at the hospice. Senate aides said that would give the Schiavos protection of federal witnesses so that no one could remove her feeding tube.
Three law professors said Congress was improperly using its subpoena power.
Mary Cheh, a law professor at George Washington University, said Congress was using the power to intervene in the case, not gather information. She said Florida courts have ruled that Schiavo's husband has the authority to exercise her constitutional rights, but Congress was trying to intrude. "The subpoena power can't be used to deny someone their constitutional rights," Cheh said.
She said that if Congress was allowed to do this, it could also use subpoena power to block a woman from having an abortion or prevent demonstrators from protesting the president.
Stetson University law professor Charles Rose said that if a congressional subpoena can be used to keep her alive, Congress would essentially have blanket power to overrule state courts.
"If you do that, why have a state at all?" Rose said. "Why not just have the federal government do everything? It's absolutely contrary to every principle of federalism." Rose said Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge George Greer made the right decision to follow through with his order to allow her feeding tube to be removed.
"Greer followed his responsibility as a member of the judiciary of the state of Florida," Rose said. "To do anything else would be to roll over and knuckle under to what is arguably an abuse of federal power."
Greg Magarian, a law professor at Villanova University Law School, said Congress was grandstanding.
"I have a hard time seeing how Congress could use subpoena power to work its will this way," he said.