The point it, after it had reached what appeared to be an ending, it was then restarted. Maybe it shouldn't, maybe that was an abuse of process and all that stuff, but it meant the consequence was a continuing legal process with a theoretical possibility that it might reach a different conclusion.

In those circumstances, to persist with the withholding of nourishment from Terri with a view to bringing about her death inevitably became as an attempt to interfere with that legal process.

The suggestion appears to be that there is no way under the American system to reach an actual final end to a process under the legal system. Not a situation where all court activity should stop, but one where it does in fact stop, regardless of whatever anybody might wish.

..........................
No, I wasn't thinking of you, Carol, when I expressed concern at the way people fall into the trap of collectively demonising those on the other side. But even on the Mudcat there have been plenty of examples of it, on both sides. And it happens time and time again in a wide range of issues, and not just in the Mudcat or on the Internet.

It seems to me a symptom of a political/ethical culture in serious trouble.