Replies

There is quite a difference between saying someone has a "globalist bent" and claiming outright that he advocates subordinating the Constitution to international will.

You never give up. The comments he made (which I posted)can EASILY and logically be construed as his position on the Constitution vis-a-vis extra-national laws and norms, especially since Breyer voted with the "IMMORAL 6" to strike down the Texas sodomy law. His actions in that ruling match his words in this article. I can only observe this consistency and come to the logical conclusion I came to. On the other hand, only God sees his motive, and he will answer to God for his godless rulings. Aside from that, there is zero doubt that he and other 5 moral relativists in black robes have used their office to take sides in the culture war - clearly that is not a Constitutional function of the SCOTUS. They overstepped their constitutional bounds - one more time. Again, the Congress has the authority to reel in this rogue court and I have written and demanded that they do just that.

Okay - Breyer voted in the majority in the Lawrence case = Breyer voted to make the Constitution subordinate to international agreements. Yep, that makes sense, especially since the Lawrence opinion found that the Constitution allows a state to ban homosexual sodomy but that the Constitution is overruled by the ECHR.

My objection is simple. The headline says that Breyer made a statement that he did not make. All of the efforts you can make to advance the claim that he believes that way do not change that simple fact.

He clearly said that there will be times when the Constitution will come into conflict with extranational laws and norms. And, in the context of increasing mobility of goods, people, and services, he said this will be a "challenge." For my own edification, please explain where he said that in these conflicts the U.S. Constitution must take a back seat to extranational laws and norms. If it takes logical steps, as you claim, please lay them out. And if you are going to rely on Lawrence, please point out where the Court indicated that the Constitution would compel a different result in the ABSENCE of extranational laws and norms.