Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 08-08-2006 ‎(executive)‎ — reading text

impact this doctrine " encompasses two fundamental the validity or the effect of any stay issued pursuant prohibitions. The first is that no branch may to this act. The Governor may lift the stay encroach upon the powers of another. The second authorized under this act at * 329 any time. A is that no branch may delegate to another branch its constitutionally assigned Chiles v. person may not be held civilly liable and is not power." subject to regulatory disciplinary sanctions for or Children A, B, C, D, E, & F, 589 So.2d 260, 264 taking any action to comply with a stay issued by Fla. 1991 ) ( citation omitted). the Governor pursuant to this act. 3) Upon issuance of a stay, the chief judge of the 2] The circuit court found that chapter 2003- 418 circuit court shall appoint a guardian ad litem for violates both of these prohibitions, and we address the patient to make recommendations to the each separately below. Our standard of review is Governor and the court. de novo. See Major League Baseball v. Morsani, Section 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming 790 So. 2d 1071, 1074 ( Fla.2001) ( stating that a trial a law. court' s ruling on a motion for summary judgment posing a pure question of law is subject to de novo Ch. 2003- 418, Laws of Fla. Thus, chapter 2003- 418 review). allowed the Governor to issue a stay to prevent the withholding of nutrition and hydration from a patient under the circumstances provided for in Encroachment on the Judicial Branch subsections ( l)( a)-( d). Under the fifteen- day sunset provision, the Governor' s authority to issue the stay We begin by addressing the argument that, as expired on November 5, 2003. See id. The applied to Theresa Schiavo, the Act encroaches on Governor' s authority to lift the stay continues the power and authority of the judicial branch. indefinitely. More than 140 years ago this Court explained the foundation of Florida' s express separation of powers provision: SEPARATION OF POWERS The framers of the Constitution of Florida, doubtless, had in mind the omnipotent power often 1] The cornerstone of American democracy known exercised by the British Parliament, the exercise of as separation of powers recognizes three separate judicial power by the Legislature in those States branches of government- the executive, the where there are no written Constitutions restraining legislative, and judicial- each with its own the them, when they wisely prohibited the exercise of powers and responsibilities. In Florida, the such powers in our State. constitutional doctrine has been expressly codified That Convention was composed of men of the best in article II, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, legal minds in the country- men of experience and which not only divides state government into three skilled in the law- who had witnessed the breaking branches but also expressly prohibits one branch down by unrestrained legislation all the security of from exercising the powers of the other two property derived from contract, the divesting of branches: vested rights by doing away the force of the law as Branches of Govemment.-The powers of the state decided, the overturning of solemn decisions* 330 government shall be divided into legislative, of the Courts of the last resort, by, under the executive and judicial branches. No person pretence of remedial acts, enacting for one or the belonging to one branch shall exercise any powers other party litigants such provisions as would appertaining to either of the other branches unless dictate to the judiciary their decision, and leaving expressly provided herein. everything which should be expounded by the judiciary to the variable and ever- changing mind of This Court ... has traditionally applied a strict the popular branch of the Government. separation of powers doctrine," State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345, 353 ( Fla.2000), and has explained that Trustees Internal Improvement Fund v. Bailey, 10 @ 2006 ThomsonlWest. No Claim to Orig. U. S. Govt. Works. 8/ 3/ 2006 https:// web2. westlaw .comlprintJprintstream. aspx?utid=%257b87F 1 E849- A561- 497D- 9703- 0CFDA...  Page 10 of 17 885 So. 2d 321 Page 10 885 So.2d 321, 29 Fla. L.Weekly S515 Cite as: 885 So. 2d 321) Fla. 238, 250 ( 1863). Similarly, the framers of the three coequal branches." Children A, B, C, D, E,' & United States Constitution recognized the need to F, 589 So.2d at 268- 69; see also Office of State establish a judiciary independent of the legislative Attorney v. Parrotino, 628 So. 2d 1097, 1099 branch. Indeed, the desire to prevent Congress Fla. 1993 ) ( "[ T] he legislature cannot take actions from using its power to interfere with the judgments that would undennine the independence of Florida' s of the courts was one of the primary motivations for judicial... offices."). the separation of powers established at this nation' s 4][5] As the United States Supreme Court has founding: This sense of a sharp necessity to separate the legislative from the judicial power, prompted by explained, the power of the judiciary is " not merely the crescendo of legislative interference with private to rule on cases, but to decide them, subject to of the courts, triumphed among the review only by superior courts" and "[ h] aving judgments of the new Federal Constitution. The achieved a judicial decision becomes the Framers finality... last word of the judicial department with regard to a Convention made the critical decision to establish a judicial department independent of the Legislative particular case or controversy." Plaut, 514 U.S. at Branch.... Before and during the debates on 218- 19, 227, 115 S. Ct. 1447. Moreover, " purely ratification, Madison, Jefferson, and Hamilton each judicial acts ... are not subject to review as to their wrote of the factional disorders and disarray that the accuracy by the Governor." In re Advisory Opinion the Governor, 213 So. 2d 716, 720 ( Fla. 1968); system of legislative equity had produced in the to the also Children A, B, C, D, E, & F, 589 So. 2d at years before the framing; and each thought that see 269 (" The judicial branch cannot be subject in * 331 separation of the legislative from the judicial power in the new Constitution would cure them. any manner to oversight by the executive branch."). Madison' s Federalist No. 48, the famous description of the by which "[ t] he legislative In Advisory Opinion, the Governor asked the Court process is every where extending the sphere of whether he had the " constitutional authority to department its activity, and drawing all power into its review the judicial accuracy and propriety of [ a impetuous vortex," referred to the report of the judge] and to suspend him from office if it does not that the Judge has exercised proper Pennsylvania Council of Censors to show that in appear ... that State " belonging to the judiciary cases judicial discretion and wisdom." 213 So. 2d at 718. department [ had frequently drawn within been] The Court agreed that the Governor had the legislative cognizance and detennination." authority to suspend a judge on the grounds of Madison relied as well on Jefferson' s Notes on the incompetency " if the physical or mental State of Virginia, which mentioned, as one example incompetency is established and detennined within of the dangerous concentration of governmental the Judicial Branch by a court of competent powers into the hands of the legislature, that " the jurisdiction." Id. at 720. However, the Court held that the Governor did not have the power to " review Legislature ... in many instances decided rights which should have been left to judiciary the judicial discretion and wisdom of a ... Judge controversy. " while he is engaged in the judicial process." Id. The Court explained that article V of the Florida Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U. S. 211, Constitution provides for appellate review for the 221- 22,