Replies

Breyer: Foreign Law Trumps
Constitution In U.S. Supreme Court

By
Bob Ellis

Perhaps Judge Breyer, along with co-conspirator Judge Sandra Day O´Connor, felt the need for this rare television appearance because of the growing sentiment for impeachment of judges who cannot or will not uphold their oath to support and protect the U.S. Constitution. Or perhaps in keeping with their recent predisposition to follow the herd in the dictates of pop culture, they just felt the need to get out there and pump up their popularity.

In any event, though his candor is somewhat surprising, the conclusion of Judge Breyer´s statement comes as no real revelation, since we are becoming accustomed to the Supreme Court putting any trendy liberal agenda ahead of the Founders intent for the Constitution. It seems a 1981 ruling by the European Court of Human Rights regarding homosexuality played a significant role in the recent Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas to overturn Texas´ sodomy law. Breyer said that the ruling by the European court showed that the Supreme Court´s prior decision in the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick that upheld state sodomy laws was not founded in Western tradition. Since when did a single ruling from some Euro-Socialist court in the 1980´s become “Western tradition?” What about all the sodomy law and rulings both before and after the swank European one? No problem; we can just ignore those inconvenient ones.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the few in his court who takes the oath of office seriously, is correct in his assertion that the views of foreign courts are irrelevant under the U.S. Constitution. Despite the lust of the globalists to subvert American sovereignty to the barbarians of the world, America is answerable to no other nation or body. We determine how we will live our lives, and by definition we are supposed to do so according to the Constitution; no other nation has a say in how we govern ourselves. I seem to recall that the War of Independence some 200 years ago had something to do with American sovereignty. No wonder the Founders warned against foreign entanglements; they saw them as threats to our sovereignty.

The Supreme Court´s job is not to make sure its rulings are in compliance with those of some foreign nation or coalition of nations. The Supreme Court´s job is not to make sure its rulings meet with the approval of pop culture and politically correct agendas. No, the Supreme Court´s job is to determine if the laws of the United States, and the rulings of lower courts, are in harmony with the United States Constitution. The pathetic state of affairs we now find ourselves in was foretold by John Story (Supreme Court Justice, 1811-1845), who said, “The truth is…the danger is not, that the judges will be too firm in resisting public opinion, and in defence of private rights or public liberties; but, that they will be too ready to yield themselves to the passions, and politics, and prejudices of the day.”

This admission certainly exposes the naiveté or outright attempts at deception of those who are trying to claim Lawrence v. Texas has no bearing on homosexual “marriage.” Guess what? Canada recently made homosexual “marriage” a reality. How long until this rogue Supreme Court decides that Canada´s decision proves our laws defining marriage as between one man and one woman are “not founded in the Western tradition” of the moment?

Our national sovereignty and our stability as a people is being seriously undermined by a group of nine rulers who are appointed and, if beyond the power of impeachment through a lack of will to use it, are unaccountable to the people of the United States. Could we really have sunk so far as to, while rejecting a king in the 18th Century, accept an oligarchy in the 21st Century? I guess that depends on whether the people will rise up and defend their Constitution, or sit in mute inaction as a great nation slides into ruin.