Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

2003 Supreme Court: For 200 years domestic law of the US recognizes the Law of Nations(Vattel)
US Supreme Court ^ | October Term, 2003 | USSC

Posted on 11/10/2010 12:58:10 PM PST by bushpilot1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last
To: bgill

Not sure who wrote affirming law of nations a part of domestic law. Do you have an idea who it might be?


21 posted on 11/10/2010 2:46:32 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bgill

I see if I search for Vattel, I find 4 other post with Vattel in the title, the earliest being June of this year. I’m no lawyer, but why wasn’t something like this explored in ‘08?


22 posted on 11/10/2010 2:58:03 PM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

No, but this speaks to 200 years of history and the First Congress.


23 posted on 11/10/2010 2:59:36 PM PST by bgill (K Parliament- how could a young man born in Kenya who is not even a native American become the POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51
That's the $64,000 question. Not long ago, Justice Thomas admitted the Supremes were "evading" the question. e·vade/iˈvād/Verb - Escape or avoid, esp. by cleverness or trickery.
24 posted on 11/10/2010 3:06:02 PM PST by bgill (K Parliament- how could a young man born in Kenya who is not even a native American become the POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows; Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; george76; PhilDragoo; Candor7; rxsid; ...
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Article, also # 14 and # 16.

[Thanks, Slings and Arrows.]

25 posted on 11/10/2010 3:08:53 PM PST by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
They did. From Article I, section 8: "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;"

They didn't in the Supreme Court decision.

26 posted on 11/10/2010 3:13:53 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

You ask why it’s taken so long for someone to note this argument.

Fact is, this has been discussed many times for many months here on Free Republic.

It just needs to get before the Court.


27 posted on 11/10/2010 3:16:38 PM PST by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

“The first crime in the indictment is an infraction of the law of Nations. This law, in its full extent, is part of the law of this State,” Lonchamps was found guilty.

A case was filed in state court. http://supreme.justia.com/us/1/111/case.html

The case is cited in the 2003 Supreme Court opinion.

Obama is breaking domestic law being president... a violation of Vattel’s Law of Nations.

The Court quoted Marshall.. Vattel’s Law of Nations is the law of the land.


28 posted on 11/10/2010 3:35:59 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1
The Court quoted Marshall.. Vattel’s Law of Nations is the law of the land.

In your dreams maybe.

29 posted on 11/10/2010 3:39:00 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bgill; kosciusko51
There is a second meaning of the word evade. Thomas is a word smith and was probably using it. It can be found in more detailed older dictionaries.

Evade...to be too difficult, puzzling or baffling , the flavor evades definition.

The qualifications evades or isdifficult, puzzling, baffling needs study.

from:
The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary...encyclopedia edition

30 posted on 11/10/2010 3:41:13 PM PST by hoosiermama (ONLY DEAD FISH GO WITH THE FLOW.......I am swimming with Sarahcudah! Sarah has read the tealeaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bgill; kosciusko51; LucyT
Let's try this again...something didn't work.
There is a second meaning of the word evade. Thomas is a word smith and was probably using it. It can be found in more detailed older dictionaries.

Evade...to be too difficult, puzzling or baffling , the flavor evades definition.

from:
The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary...encyclopedia edition

The qualifications evades or is difficult, puzzling, baffling..... needs study.

31 posted on 11/10/2010 3:49:30 PM PST by hoosiermama (ONLY DEAD FISH GO WITH THE FLOW.......I am swimming with Sarahcudah! Sarah has read the tealeaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

Exactly.


32 posted on 11/10/2010 4:06:37 PM PST by ataDude (Its like 1933, mixed with the Carter 70s, plus the books 1984 and Animal Farm, all at the same time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

When the Constitution refers to the “Law of Nations,” they are not referring to Vattel’s book. “The law of nations” was the 18th century term for what we today call “international law.” Vattel was one writer on that subject.


33 posted on 11/10/2010 4:30:32 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Can you copy and past from the source? I can’t open the document.


34 posted on 11/10/2010 4:46:11 PM PST by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Chief Justice said..the source of “law of nations” written in the Constitution is from Vattel.


35 posted on 11/10/2010 4:50:00 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PA-RIVER

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/03pdf/03-339.pdf


36 posted on 11/10/2010 4:51:47 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: PA-RIVER
Photobucket
37 posted on 11/10/2010 5:07:27 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
"If they were referring to Vatel’s book then wouldn’t they have capitalized “Law of Nations”? The NS Spin game stops. Photobucket
38 posted on 11/10/2010 5:36:21 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1
The NS Spin game stops.

But the bushpilot1 fantasy goes on...and on...and on...

39 posted on 11/10/2010 5:40:40 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1
Yeah, their voices are fewer in between and slowly shutting up.
Remember back about 2 years ago, the birthers were called kooks and a fringe group that has a cause that is going nowhere ? .... and now ? their voices are saying, ahhh just leave him in office until 2012, he will be voted out.. my my, how 2 years have changed things...
Now why would they be now saying " just leave him in office and let him serve his term out until 2012 " .... so now ? they are admitting that he is a fraud ?
40 posted on 11/10/2010 5:44:57 PM PST by American Constitutionalist (The fool has said in his heart, " there is no GOD " ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson