Supreme Court or World Court?

The New American ^ | 12-01-03

[hope]

Supreme Court or World Court?

On October 28, the Atlanta-based Southern Center for International Studies presented Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor its World Justice Award. During her acceptance speech, O’Connor expressed concern that the High Court has seldom considered foreign laws when reaching important decisions affecting U.S. jurisprudence. She was gratified to note, however, that a few recent decisions may be signaling a change, as the court increasingly acknowledges legal standards set by the "global community."

O’Connor approvingly noted that two important Supreme Court decisions in which she concurred were based in part on foreign laws. A 2002 case, Atkins v. Virginia, further undermined capital punishment for heinous crimes by barring the execution of supposedly mentally retarded individuals. And a 2003 case, Lawrence v. Texas, further eroded the moral underpinnings of our culture by striking down Texas’ anti-sodomy law.

In the latter case, O’Connor reminded her audience of internationalists, the court majority relied partly on a series of decisions by European courts. For instance, Justice Anthony Kennedy asserted in his majority decision that "the right the petitioners seek in this case has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom in many other countries," and there was no evidence that governmental interest in circumscribing sexual deviancy (which he termed "personal choice") is "somehow more legitimate or urgent" in the U.S. Though O’Connor’s concurring opinion disagreed with some of Kennedy’s reasoning, it did not take issue with his reliance on foreign laws.

Justice O’Connor predicted that, "over time, we will rely increasingly — or take notice at least increasingly — on international and foreign law in resolving domestic issues." Doing so, she speculated, "may not only enrich our own country’s decisions, I think it may create that all important good impression." More likely, it would further de-Constitutionalize High Court decisions while advancing the collectivist new world order that Justice O’Connor appears to embrace.

[tbpiper]

If the court ignores the constitution, we should ignore the court.

[BenLurkin]

"If the court ignores the constitution, we should ignore the court."

It does seem to be coming close to the day.

[Congressman Billybob]

Why are various news outlets so slow in noticing and reporting on this obvious story? FreeRepublic had this story a month ago, because I wrote it up and posted it up. FR had it first under the name and thread, "Open Judicial Mouth, Insert Foot." ChronWatch picked it up second. Then two other outlets breathlessly (but late) followed suit.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "False Reporting on the Medicare Vote," discussion thread. FOR A FREEPER IN CONGRESS, CLICK HERE.

[Old Sarge]

How many people still believe we're winning the war?

We've lost the home front.

[narses]

Ping. If you do not get involved in politics, don't blame anyone but yourself for judges like this.

[Paleo Conservative]

Why are various news outlets so slow in noticing and reporting on this obvious story? FreeRepublic had this story a month ago, because I wrote it up and posted it up.

Because the press are for the most part lazy leftists. They don't care if our Constitution get usurped by foreign law, and they don't generally know people who do.

By the way how is your fund raising going for your run to become a real Congressman?

[Holden Magroin]

The six justices who voted to create a constitutional right to sodomy said the Court should consult international law and the laws of "enlightened" western European countries whenever the U.S. Constitution doesn't allow homosexuals or minorities to prevail.

Earlier, the same pompous know-it-alls cited the European Union charter to justify their decision upholding the University of Michigan's racial quota system.

Worse, Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered a speech in which she declared that those who only consulted the U.S. Constitution had a "cowboy mentality" and that they needed to "get with the times."

Ginsburg and Breyer, by the way, were confirmed with the overwhelming support of Republicans. So-called conservative Orin Hatch said Breyer was a "moderate" who believed in judicial self-restraint. Now Breyer is one of the most activist judges of all time.

Conservatives don't seem to know or care about the implications of these recent Supreme Court rulings. These decisions by the liberal-dominated Court are eroding American sovereignty and destroying representative government. Not only has the Court said in decisions like Roe v. Wade that Americans are no longer free to pass their own laws, they are no longer free to elect their own leaders. Conservatives need to summon the courage to impeach rogue judges like Ginsburg; otherwise, we will soon wake up to America under effete European socialists, tinhorn African dictators, and psychotic oil sheiks.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"We've lost the home front."

Yes. And just because we see it happening and our enemies come into focus, does not mean we are all of a sudden winning.

Too many on the right are too confident.

[EGPWS]

O’Connor reminded her audience of internationalists, the court majority relied partly on a series of decisions by European courts. For instance, Justice Anthony Kennedy asserted in his majority decision that "the right the petitioners seek in this case has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom in many other countries,"

Apparently those who consider our constitution "living and breathing" are correct in their considerations.

[Old Sarge]

I'm not. I have no confidence that conservatives will stand up to Socialism. It has been one retreat after another.

I can't tell the DNC and GOP platforms apart anymore.

[Jeff Chandler]

This is what happens when you put a woman in a position of power.

I'm just kidding. Oh man, am I ever going to get flamed!)

[gcruse]

Sandra, darling, could you step over here a moment? Thank you, sweets. You know, I love seeing women achieve high office and responsibility.

I've been a fan of yours all along. But, now listen closely dear, the job of the Supreme Court is to base decisions on the US Constitution and the corpus of US law. We see things like, for instance, the truth not being a defense against libel in the UK. Or how Canada practices prior restraint on publishers.

In short, darling, and I mean it sincerely, get over yourself. Turning the US into Euro-Juche is not in your job description. Now, go back to the party, bless your heart.

[Congressman Billybob]

Thanks for your specific question (I guess). Fund-raising is going slower than I expected in theory. That has only caused me to refocus and redouble my efforts. Anything worth doing is worth doing well.

John / Billybob

[clee1]

Our Republic is doomed. The Second Civil War is imminent.

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP - US SOVEREIGNTY ISSUES

[endthematrix]

I'm spiting and cursing.

Of course the speech was preceded by a wonderful caviar and champaign brunch and afterwords a wonderful poem written by Karl Marx was read by Nelson Mandela

[the invisib1e hand]

We've lost the home front.

then it's time to take it back. if you're too old, soldier, then please step back.

[endthematrix]

"If you do not get involved in politics, don't blame anyone but yourself for judges like this."

For those that do get "involved" who are we to blame? The question is not so easy.

There is many facets to the game that is ultimately rules your future. Highly organized players at work here. The system is in place.She has come out of hiding to take acceptance for her part.