Posted on 11/20/2008 9:18:33 AM PST by Daffynition
Judges who use foreign laws to interpret the U.S. Constitution are rewriting it rather than respecting its founders, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia told a roomful of judges and top lawyers in Houston on Monday night.
"I fear the courts' use of foreign law in interpreting the Constitution will continue at an accelerated pace," the 72-year-old conservative jurist said.
Scalia spoke at a $150-a-head steak and potatoes dinner sponsored by the local chapter of the Federal Bar Association and held at the Hyatt Regency Houston downtown. Before talking for about 30 minutes, the jurist autographed copies of a book he co-authored.
Scalia promised to be noncontroversial but frequently used the example of Lawrence v. Texas, a Houston case in which he disagreed with the majority that struck down Texas' anti-sodomy law. Scalia complained that foreign laws were cited in that case.
Scalia was typically evangelical in his advocacy of "originalism," or strictly adhering to what the Constitutional authors meant more than 200 years ago. He criticized those who see the Constitution as an evolving or "living document" that adapts to the times.
The 1986 Reagan appointee said he'll only become a believer in those who cite foreign law if they do it more universally, like in abortion cases where more countries prohibit it than don't. "The court has ignored foreign law in its abortion cases," he said.
Scalia said the founders of this country did not want us to emulate Europe.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
This shouldn’t be an issue, but the leftist judges on the Supreme Court are always looking the world over for laws that agree with their prejudices.
Whatever became of our constitutional republic? Did it become passe?
Government is a scourge on our independence and is no longer a protector of freedom. So let’s go to work and vote in some Republicans.
The first court in the Berg case deferred to Congress, since it’s Congress’s responsibility to write the laws to enforce the constitution and also to certify the election.
If SCOTUS passes on a full hearing for this, couldn’t any congressman issue a congressional subpoena? Or how do congressional subpoena’s work?
The problem of course in leaving it to congress is with a democratic majority, they aren’t going to be willing to do anything until Obama is out of office.
Thank you for that link.
I’m embarrassed to admit, I never read the Federalist Papers.
I will make a promise to do so - quickly. We will need the ammo.
“Why don’t Americans realize that? (Rhetorical question)”
Because they are ignorant, lazy and would rather have information spoon-fed them by the drive by media so they can watch their soaps, Dancing with the Stars, football games and play computer games rather than study why America is here, what history can teach them and why the Democrats and Muslims are the greatest threats to western civilization since Attila and the Huns.
They also have Hollywood actors and actresses of such intelligence that they can handle politics and educate them as well.
All American law relies on European precedent: English Common Law.
Hey, Bozo, if Scalia takes this controversy seriously, I’ll respect him even more. I doubt it; the fix is in. Now go eat a bullet.
Magna Carta too.
I guess the point is that the basis of judicial decisions in America should be based on the COnstitution and the legal thinking which preceeded it, instead of contemporary western European socialist jurisprudence or third world primitive concepts.
That is true. If foreign law were as good as ours, the rest of the world would be like the USA, but it isn’t and they aren’t.
God Bless Scalia.
Sadly the Republicans wee responsible for most of this. Orin Hatch recommended Ginsberg, and another lefty that I forget, as two choices that would sail through the Senate committee which Hath chaired, and sure enough they did.
Good point.
Orin Hatch is one of those reasons the GOP needs to go.
He’s a popular guy, but basically - he’s an idiot. But he is a Mormon Idiot from Utah who has racked up his share of “favors” for the local constituents and is basically a nice guy. But he’s a lib.
He needs to be replaced by an intelligent conservative Mormom from Utah with Testacles - there are a LOT of them around.
I am going to! Not that I have any position of importance to influence anyone, but just to know. I am also having my whole family, me, my kids and husband, listen through a government series by the called the 5000 Year Leap published byt he National Center for Constitutional Studies that explains the whole constitution and the principles behind everything in it (principles the founders were all well versed in such as Old Testament principles of limited government and representation, Blackstone’s Law, Natural Law, etc. My kids like it even though they roll their eyes when I say it’s time to watch, they really pay attnetion and like answering the questions at the end. I’m going to buy several sets of this series to send out to some Senators and Congressmen.
Yeah, just wait till they start using Sharia in their decisions. Give it 10 years.
Yeah, the Republicans had the silly idea that if a president won an election,
he should be able to appoint the judges that he wants to as a result of that win.
The Democrats during the Bush admin showed us how wrong the GOP was on that view. The SENATE (or at least 41 members of it) gets to determine what judges are appointed.
/sarc
The First and Second Amendments reflect our basic standards of rights -- to life, liberty, and property.. Rights which cannot be altered or infringed, even through the amendment process. -- Any 'amendments' that violated our basic rights would be unconstitutional, - null & void from enactment. [see Marbary v Madison]
Does Obama know that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.