Posted on 03/08/2005 6:27:33 AM PST by captain_dave
Please join me in writing your Congressman to ask for a Bill of Impeachment for Justice Breyer.
--------------
Supreme Court citing more foreign cases. Scalia: Only U.S. views are relevant
By Joan Biskupic USA TODAY
"WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court's reference to foreign law in a ruling last month that overturned state anti-sodomy statutes stood out as if it were in bold print and capital letters. ..."full article
------------
I'm "picking" on Justice Breyer because of his outspoken attitudes towards using foreign law, especially in his aired discussion with Justice Scalia. Justices debate use of foreign precedents
I sent this letter to my Congressman:
----------------
Dear Congressman
I recently heard excerpts of Justice Breyer debating with Justice Scalia. I am very concerned with Justice Brier’s arguments. To me, he is saying he is no longer bound by the United States Constitution. The very idea of using foreign law, or “international law”, in making a Supreme Court decision is unacceptable.
I urge you, sir, to consider proposing a bill of impeachment for Justice Breyer. He is, by citing foreign law, undermining our Constitution. He is no longer supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States.
Sincerely
---------------
(I received a reply that he forwarded the letter to the House Judiciary Committee)
Dear Congressman
Thank you for writing to me about the letter I sent concerning Justice Breyer.
I sincerely believe his and the other Justice’s citations of foreign law in Supreme Court decisions threaten our Constitution and our Liberty. Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution states: “This Constitution … shall be the supreme Law of the Land …”
I strongly believe that the violation of one’s oath by an official of the United States is a “high crime and misdemeanor” as the Framers of the Constitution understood the phrase to mean. To swear an oath to support the Constitution and then, when it becomes convenient to do so, completely disregard it, and instead create original law in contradiction to the Constitution, is, in my mind, perjury.
I urge you to consider proposing a bill of impeachment for Justice Breyer. It is past time to put a stop to this tyranny.
Most Sincerely,
Sorry about the bad tag
USA Today: Supreme Court citing more foreign cases
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-07-07-foreign-usat_x.htm
I just got in a huge (albeit friendly) argument with some other lawyers last night over this. I took the position that the justices citing foreign law should be impeached. To be fair, though, if Breyer needs to go for this reason, so does Kennedy.
Sounds good to me. Let's make it double.
This is indeed a serious problem, and it is particularly acute with regards to the 2nd Amendment. As we know, the personal right to bear arms is widely denied around the world, and a U.S. judge could site "world opinion" is a rationale for scrapping our right to bear arms, and to hell with the Constitution.
1) no Justice has "relied" upon foreign law for his/her opinion or "based" any decision on such. At worst they have supported their decision derived from American jurisprudence and the Constitution by refering to concurrence in foreign law.
2) Impeachment is limited to violations of "good behavior" not unpopular/wrong/questionable rulings.
This idea just makes you look like a kook.
I disagree with you. Any SCJ, by citing foreign law, attitudes, etc., in a decision tells us that they are a part of their consideration and that, is unacceptable, period! The USA is a unique and totally independent nation. We are back to the concept of judicial review. What does the constitution say? That is the only point of deliberation.
No decisions have been based upon anything but US law. This is nothing more than considering law elsewhere which supports those decisions. A wise man can never learn too much about an issue or question or how things are done elsewhere.
Most of our legal traditions and concepts come from the Western tradition and are based upon English common law, Roman law, the writings of European jurists of the last 500 years.
Panic if you like but there is nothing here. It is not as if there is anything called "foreign law" anyway or that there is any similiarity between the laws of Uganda and Italy.
Either I do not understand you or you're missing my point. If you are a person put in charge of judging a situation and you can go one way or another, considering the views of how other countries treat this situation can prejudice you. The point isn't how you feel, the point is, what does our constitution say and how does it apply to the situation. The decision of the SCJ IS the law which, recently has been changing the law as we have known it for over 200 years or so. The SCJ do not have the right to write the law.
No I am not missing your point but believe you are not viewing what has happened correctly. These Justices are not swayed from a neutral position by foreign law. They have their minds already made up and attempt to buttress those positions by saying "Hey look we are in accord with blah, blah, blah in this ruling." You and I may say "who gives a shiite what blah, blah, blah thinks" so it does not make it anymore palatable for us. But the ruling was not based upon that law.
There has NEVER been a ruling based upon foreign law. Read what Kennedy said in the recent Teenage Killers case. He accurately describes what is going on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.