Justices: When in Rome, do as the Romans do

By eMail from the American Conservative Union ^ | Tuesday July 15 2003 | David Keene

[Brian Allen]

The news that five members of the Supreme Court were winging their way over to Italy on the heels of the decision striking down Texas' anti-sodomy law seemed somehow appropriate.

Some of the flying judges were no doubt there to discuss their newly proposed constitution -- given as the official reason for the junket. But two or three of them must have at least contemplated communing with European elitists on how they ought to vote on upcoming cases here. After all, in the Texas case they had for the first time in a majority opinion cited European public opinion, decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and other foreign courts as reasons to strike down the Texas law.

It was the first time that the U.S. Supreme Court had ever cited foreign decisions and opinions in this way as major determining factors in a major case and was the principal reason for Justice Antonin Scalia's scathing dissent. Scalia, joined by Justices William Rehnquist and Clarence Thomas, wrote of the majority's reliance on foreign opinion and judicial decisions as a basis for the decision, that "the court's discussion of these foreign views... is meaningless dicta, however, since this court should not impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans."

In fact, of course, the court majority or some of those making it up are caught up in the need to march in step with those in Europe. Justice Stephen Breyer, for example, likes to talk about the need in the future to "harmonize" our laws with those of Europe and went so far as to appear on television after the Texas sodomy case to wonder whether our constitution will remain "relevant" in the coming age of globalization.

The implications of a reliance on the opinions emanating from Brussels are profound. Does this mean that in the next term the court will strike down the death penalty as inconsistent, not with the Constitution but with the position of the European Parliament or that the justices will review European campaign finance laws before voting on the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold reforms? Who can say?

It was Breyer who, along with Justice Anthony Kennedy seemed most taken with the opinions of the Europeans in deciding the Texas case. Indeed, Kennedy in the court's majority opinion specifically cited and praised an amicus brief filed in the case by Mary Robinson, the controversial former head of the U.N. Commission for Human Rights, suggesting that in deciding the case, the U.S. Supreme Court should follow the lead of other nations in recognizing a "global concept" of homosexual rights.

Forget for a minute the question of whether Texas' anti-sodomy law represented good or bad public policy, and consider instead the broader implications of the way in which the court went about striking it down. Their decision was based not on the language of the Constitution nor the wishes, beliefs or opinions of the founders. It wasn't even based on previous Supreme Court precedents, lower federal or state court opinions or a developing consensus view in the United States.

Instead, it was grounded in court decisions and public attitudes that have developed in Britain, France and the rest of what is increasingly known as "Old Europe."

As Scalia also pointed out, the court didn't crank the opinions of Africa, the Middle East or Asia into their decision-making. Had they done so, they might have found some substantial disagreement with the "global concept" of homosexual rights that they found in Europe. The fact is that the views the justices find so attractive are those of the European upper-class elite: the folks who sit around in Paris and Brussels looking down their noses at us and opining on how the world ought to be run. For the U.S. Supreme Court or any justice who sits on that court to base a vote on their opinions, attitudes and prejudices makes a mockery of the court, the Constitution and history.

If Justice John Marshall had asserted the right of judicial review at the dawn of the 19th century because of a perceived need or desire to "harmonize" our views with the views of those who then populated the salons of Europe, he'd have been driven off the court and out of town on a rail.

We don't do that anymore, but good ideas are truly timeless.

David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, is a managing associate with the Carmen Group, a D.C.-based governmental affairs firm

[Brian Allen]

As Scalia also pointed out, the court didn't crank the opinions of Africa, the Middle East or Asia into their decision-making. Had they done so, they might have found some substantial disagreement with the "global concept" of homosexual rights that they found in Europe. The fact is that the views the justices find so attractive are those of the European upper-class elite: the folks who sit around in Paris and Brussels looking down their noses at us and opining on how the world ought to be run. For the U.S. Supreme Court or any justice who sits on that court to base a vote on their opinions, attitudes and prejudices makes a mockery of the court, the Constitution and history.

God save Our Beloved FRaternal Republic from this evil terrorist gang.

God save Our Nation and Our Civilization from these foul spawn and bastard offspring of the treasonous Franklin Delanor "Brow-Bag" Roosevelt's accomodations with and absorption of the Communist Party of America into the administrative branch of America's feral gummint -- and on to the benches of our courts.

Save US, Dear Lord, from these black-robed, black-hearted and black-intentioned bloody lawyer terrorists who; having annointed themselves with more self-granted, extra-Constitututional, un-and-anti-American dictatorial power than was -- post-Magna-Charta -- ever available to England's crazy king George; now so arbitrarily and destructively -- and unchecked by threat of War of Independence or by the People's fidelity to the Principle of Individual Liberty -- wield it.

And save and bless Our Nation's President, George Walker Bush and strengthen his resolve and his back to the Herculean task of cleaning out the foul Augean Stables that is America's once-supreme court. And to replacing its totalitarian terrorists with American Constitutionalists!

Please, Dear Lord?

[Support Free Republic]

---

GOD BLESS OUR MILITARY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
	Keep Our Republic Free Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER It's on the Breaking News Sidebar

[Brian Allen]

once-supreme court ping

[freekitty]

Now the SC judges are doing the circuit.

Is everything entertainment?

[FierceDraka]

And if God doesn't save us from the Supreme Court, then who else will do the job?

I'll leave you to ponder this question for yourself. (click-CLACK!)

[tdadams]

As Scalia also pointed out, the court didn't crank the opinions of Africa, the Middle East or Asia into their decision-making.

I guess some people's complaint is that the SC didn't take into equal consideration the norms of countries inclined to bloody coups, corruption, genocide, tribal warfare, dogmatic oppression, and barberous beheadings and amputations as criminal punishment.

Yeah, that's really a shame.

[MeekOneGOP]

Thanks, BA. Amen !!

barf alert!

MICHAEL STUPARYK/TORONTO STAR

Michael Stark, left, and Michael Lashner pop champagne
and kiss after their wedding ceremony yesterday.
Leshner called the ruling, "Day One for millions of gays
and lesbians around the world."

Gay couple married after ruling
(Toronto, Canada)

B.C. court OK's gay marriage -
first gay couple legally married in British Columbia

Gays Flock to Divorce Court

Same-sex unions in 'News' -
Dallas Morning News to publish FREE
same sex unions announcements

The Media's Gay Mafia "Queers" the News

Useful Idiot Caption-A-Rama: Special Gay Pride Edition!

[shaggy eel]

BTTT

[Brian Allen]

<< And if God doesn't save us from the Supreme Court, then who else will do the job? >>

Last time a tyranny ruled Our Nation it took God's help -- and an American War of Independence.

I reckon that'll do it every darned time.

[Brian Allen]

<< As Scalia also pointed out, the court didn't crank the opinions of Africa, the Middle East or Asia into their decision-making.

I guess some people's complaint is that the SC didn't take into equal consideration the norms of countries inclined to bloody coups, corruption, genocide, tribal warfare, dogmatic oppression, and barberous beheadings and amputations as criminal punishment. >>

You missed out the best part. Africa and Asia also have the world's fastest growing Christian communities [There are now as many as two hundred million Chinese Christians] and many, including those that comprise the world's largest Anglican/Epicopal province, are severing ties with North American and once-great British "bishops" and are sending missionaries to the uk and to America to turn the Church in both of those places away from deviancy, degeneration and insidious evil and back to Biblical, historical and theological Truth -- and to the Christ.

My guess -- and common sense's -- is that Justice Scalia had those Good folks in mind.

[tdadams]

My guess -- and common sense's -- is that Justice Scalia had those Good folks in mind.

That's common sense, huh? Of course, looking to that part of the world, everyone thinks of Chinese Christian missionaries called to convert the heathen Western civilizations rather than Buddhists and brutal Communists. It's only common sense.