``This was no surprise, but still disappointing,'' attorney David Gibbs said of the sharply worded rejection issued by the 2nd District Court of Appeal to Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler.

``We intend to appeal, and that appeal will be to the U.S. Supreme Court,'' Gibbs said.

A request for a stay of Friday's scheduled removal of Terri Schiavo's life-sustaining feeding tube will be filed with the high court no later than early today, Gibbs said.

Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, where Congress may begin voting on a Schiavo bill today, and in Tallahassee, where conflicts may be ironed out this morning, lawmakers are trying to craft measures that can pass constitutional muster and come to a vote in time.

Michael Schiavo's attorney hailed Wednesday's appeals court ruling as ``an amazing document.''

The court clearly stated that by law, even the Schindlers would be obligated to remove their daughter's feeding tube should they somehow reverse five years of court decisions granting that right to husband and guardian Michael Schiavo, attorney George Felos said.

``No matter who her guardian is, the guardian is required to obey the court order because the court, and not the guardian, has determined the decision that Mrs. Schiavo herself would make,'' the ruling states.

The appeals judges were referring to the original, February 2000 finding by Circuit Judge George Greer that ``clear and convincing'' testimony at a nonjury trial the previous month showed Terri Schiavo made statements prior to her 1990 heart failure that she would not want to be kept alive in a vegetative state without hope of improvement.

Bob and Mary Schindler dispute medical evidence that their now 41-year-old daughter's brain was destroyed by lack of oxygen. They say she reacts to them and can improve.

The appeals court also rejected the couple's contention their daughter's due process right to legal representation was violated during five years of review by higher courts after Greer's 2000 ruling.

``That decision has been subject to appeals and postjudgment scrutiny of all varieties,'' the appeals court wrote. ``Not only has Mrs. Schiavo's case been given due process, but few, if any, similar cases have ever been afforded this heightened level of process.''

The appeals court ruling closed with a ``message that what's happening now in the case and the proposed legislation is a threat to democracy,'' Felos said.

Noting the process used by the courts to decide Terri Schiavo's fate was created by lawmakers, the appeals court wrote: ``Neither the trial court nor this court can change this established law at this stage of these proceedings.

``No one who considers the dismal history of countries in which courts and judges have abandoned the rule of law would ask us to abandon the rule of law even in this case,'' the ruling concluded.

State Lawmakers Haggle

In Tallahassee, negotiations continued late Wednesday on conflicting Senate and House bills seeking to keep Schiavo alive.

Both chambers are scheduled to be in session today and Friday. Advocates were not expecting to have a compromise by this morning but still hoped to have a bill to the governor for his signature before the 1 p.m. Friday deadline for removing the feeding tube.

The House bill that cleared its last committee Tuesday prohibits the removal of a feeding tube from someone in a persistent vegetative state if the person has no written directive or there is no clear and convincing evidence that they specified that food and water be withheld. The Senate version blocks the withholding of a feeding tube only in cases in which family members or guardians are in dispute over the decision to withhold it.

Lawmakers are wrangling with language some consider unconstitutional. That was the fate of the original ``Terri's Law,'' a 2003 bill that was deemed by the courts to be too narrowly crafted.

Towson Fraser, spokesman for House Speaker Allan Bense, R-Panama City, said negotiators are attempting ``to see if there's some language that's A, constitutional, and B, capable of passing both chambers.'' House and Senate sponsors were not tipping their hands late Wednesday on what specifics they were negotiating.

State Rep. Dennis Baxley, the House sponsor, said he was ``cautiously optimistic'' a consensus would be reached. ``I'm still on the mission to try to pass a bill by the end of the week that's good public policy and would affect all living persons at the time the bill takes effect,'' Baxley said Wednesday. ``Around here, 48 hours can be a long time.''

Action On Capitol Hill

In Washington, meanwhile, Republicans continued efforts to pass a law that would give a federal court the final say over Terri Schiavo's life.

With time running out, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist expects to continue efforts today to secure agreement among Democrats to act quickly by unanimously consenting to vote on a measure rather than putting it to a full debate and vote.

That may require a different form of legislation from what was advanced by Florida Republican Mel Martinez, which would allow representatives of any ``incapacitated'' person to ask a federal judge to review a case like Schiavo's.

One possibility: a bill that addresses only her case.

In the House, Dave Weldon, R-Fla., and Judiciary Committee chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., worked for support of an identical bill, which could win the backing of the full House as early as today.

Weldon has rounded up 125 co-sponsors. In the Senate, Martinez has 11. The numbers are impressive, given they introduced the legislation only days ago.

``The leadership in the Senate is completely committed to getting a bill passed and having it on the president's desk by Friday,'' Martinez said.

Reporter Keith Epstein contributed to this report.