[Steve Van Doorn]

You can disagree with their decisions but I don’t see this as impeachable.

Our laws have always been based on foreign law. Judges must take into consideration of Tariffs and should observe foreign law to influence not take directly from the foreign law, which I see no sign of that here.

[Publius6961]

You can disagree with their decisions but I don’t see this as impeachable.

Who judges the Judgers?

How does one deal with a rogue Supreme? it may have been "unthinkable" until recently, but so what?

Lots of things are accepted today that were unthinkable 50 years ago...

[jwalsh07]

Our laws have always been based on foreign law. Judges must take into consideration of Tariffs and should observe foreign law to influence not take directly from the foreign law, which I see no sign of that here.

There are only two instances where consideration of foreign law is valid, one has to do with interpretation of treaties and the other is to seek the original meaning of a phrase contained in our constitution such as "due process". That's it.

Do you think foreign laws and or moral precepts should be authoritative in SCOTUS' holdings?

If not, then why the heck should they cite them?

Citing foreign mores and/or court cases should hold NO sway in holdings of the SCOTUS, they are bound by their oath and the Constitution for their controlling authority to be the "Supreme Law of the Land". The Supreme LAw of the LAnd is the Constitution and those laws passed by the United States Congress. That's it, end of story.