Ginsburg: Rulings in other countries are relevant here ( referred to the findings of foreign courts)

ap ^ | Monday, August 4, 2003 | ap

[comnet]

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.

Writing for the majority in a landmark decision supporting gay civil rights, Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that the European Court of Human Rights and other foreign courts have affirmed the ''rights of homosexual adults to engage in intimate, consensual conduct.''

Never before had the Supreme Court's majority cited a foreign legal precedent in such a big case. Kennedy's opinion in Lawrence vs. Texas, which was signed by four other justices, has ignited a debate among analysts over whether it was a signal that the justices will adopt foreign courts' views of individual liberties.

In theory, that could mean the currently conservative court someday might be influenced by other countries' opposition to the death penalty, their emphasis on foreign prisoners' rights and even their acceptance of same-sex marriages. (Last month, a court in Canada lifted a ban on such unions.)

But it is far from clear that the U.S. high court routinely will turn to foreign law, and the practice has its critics -- notably Justice Antonin Scalia. When the court interprets the Constitution, he has written, U.S. attitudes about what is decent and right -- not foreign ones -- are what should matter.

In Lawrence vs. Texas, the court relied most fundamentally on the U.S. Constitution's right of privacy to strike down laws prohibiting oral and anal sex between consenting adults of the same sex. But it also emphasized the ''values we share with a wider civilization'' and how privacy for gay men and lesbians ''has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom in many other countries.''

''It surprised me to see it in a majority opinion because there has been a debate among the justices over whether foreign law is relevant'' to rulings on U.S. law, says Yale law professor Drew Days, a former U.S. solicitor general.

Days is among those who saw the reference as a step forward. ''The justices are gaining the benefit of very sophisticated thinking by other foreign courts about privacy and equality,'' he says. ''Those terms are not unique to our Constitution and our society.''

Last year, Justice John Paul Stevens cited foreign law in a footnote when the majority banned executions of mentally retarded convicts. Stevens noted that ''within the world community, the . . . death penalty for crimes committed by mentally retarded offenders is overwhelmingly disapproved.''

That drew a rebuke from Scalia, who said, ''The views of other nations, however enlightened the justices of this court may think them to be, cannot be imposed upon Americans through the Constitution.'' Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas joined Scalia in his dissent.

In the Texas case, Scalia -- joined once again by Rehnquist and Thomas -- wrote that ''the court's discussion of these foreign views (ignoring, of course, the many countries that have retained criminal prohibitions on sodomy) is ... meaningless dicta. Dangerous dicta, however, since this court should not impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans.'' (Justice Sandra Day O'Connor voted with the Kennedy majority in the case but wrote a separate opinion.)

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer have been the most enthusiastic justices in giving consideration to foreign legal trends. In voting last month to uphold an affirmative action policy at the University of Michigan, Ginsburg, joined by Breyer, highlighted an international treaty that endorsed the use of race-conscious programs to help minorities.

But it was Kennedy's opinion striking down the anti-sodomy laws that set off debate among close observers of the court.

His opinion referred to a ''friend of the court'' brief that described liberty as a global concept and detailed how other countries protect the privacy of gay men and lesbians. It was submitted by Mary Robinson, former United Nations high commissioner for human rights, and others. Kennedy said there was no evidence that the USA has a ''more legitimate or urgent'' reason than other countries to ban homosexual sex. The ruling in the Texas case came June 26, on the last day of the high court's annual term. Several justices were leaving for conferences overseas that also serve as reminders of how the justices increasingly are in touch with foreign legal issues.

This week, five of the nine justices -- O'Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg and Breyer -- will be in Florence, Italy, for a forum with foreign judges on a proposed new European constitution.

[AdamSelene235]

I M P E A C H

Republicans in Congress just favored continued UN membership 2 to 1.

There is no chance the globo-Socialists will impeach their own kind.

[The UnVeiled Lady]

I thought we were supposed to be the leaders of the world.

If we stick to our Constitution, then the rest of the world can follow our lead not the other way around

What a stupid judge!!!

[comnet]

international laws and treaties make the laws for America now

[comnet]

Republicans in Congress just favored continued UN membership 2 to 1.

Kiss America goodby

[CCCV]

Ping (for future reading)

[comnet]

"The spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may commence persecution, and better men be his victims. It can never be too often repeated, that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war (Revolutionary War) we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion." Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, p. 169 (last part of Query, XVII), Boston: Lilly and Wait, 1832

[Clara Lou]

I M P E A C H
I have a hearty "amen" for you.

[OPS4]

Our citizens can create a grass routes referendum to the legislature for an amendment of the laws for impeaching a judge.

Now is the time to get it on the ballots in every state
possible for the presidential elections, then we will see
how they feel about the subject, during an election year!

Ops4 God Bless America!

[CCCV]

I have written the people holding the position that a Senator would have if we had a Senator about impeachment of these judges. I doubt if I'll get a response unless the Republican leadership decides it is the thing to do. They are both mindless Republican sheep incapable of independant thought. Not unlike Clintonites, they just follow a different leader.

[Weimdog]

According to Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code, each Supreme Court Justice takes the following oath:


"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.''

http://bensguide.gpo.gov/3-5/symbols/oaths.html

U.S. Constitution

Article. III.

Section. 1.

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section. 2.

Clause 1: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State; (See Note 10)--between Citizens of different States, --between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

Clause 2: In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Clause 3: The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section. 3.

Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Clause 2: The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

[Buckeye McFrog]

Right on....clearly a breach of her pledge to defend the Constitution of the United States, and clearly actionable.

Keep buidling your lists....the treason trials
are coming someday.

[nightdriver]

"Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change," Ginsburg said Saturday....."

Isn't there some way we can impeach these scatter-brained justices? They're not only idiotic, they are damned dangerous!

They all seem to be infected with delusions of omnipotence!

[pgyanke]

The President, Ambassadors and Diplomats deal with foreign powers and international polic.

The Legislature writes the laws as representatives of the people.

The Judiciary decides disputes between parties based on the laws as written.

I M P E A C H

[puroresu]

So much for all those people here who assured us the recent sodomy ruling was nothing to worry about. Why, those "liberal" judges were just trying to get big government off our backs and out of our bedrooms. Yeah, right.

[Do Be]

Impeach.

[veracious]

....the treason trials

Those that seek to deprive US citizens of their US constitution, and usurp the laws thereof, are committing treason. Impeachment is too generous.

Those that don't like the form of law created by our fore-fathers must amend the US constitution; otherwise, the law of the land, that binds us all, is that document.

As for me and my household, we will defend the US constitutional republic.

[Migraine]

"Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change," Ginsburg said

You effing communist. What a effing insult.

[Uncle Hal]

This is an idea of what the court would think like if Hillary gets elected president. She has to be stopped at all costs.