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.
Very good point. But they stressed it wasn’t controlling their outcome.
I will agree that they are skating on thin ice but I don’t see this as a strong case against them.