Article

2003-10-31 Home Front

EFL/Fair Use
American courts need to pay more attention to international legal decisions to help create a more favorable impression abroad, said U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day OâConnor at an awards dinner in Atlanta. "The impressions we create in this world are important, and they can leave their mark," OâConnor said, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The 73-year-old justice and some of her high court colleagues have made similar appeals to foreign law, not only in speeches and interviews, but in some of their legal opinions. Her most recent public remarks came at a dinner Tuesday sponsored by the Atlanta-based Southern Center for International Studies.
Excuse me, but I believe the oath that Judges take is quite similar to the ones I took as a member of the Air Force. Somewhere in that oath are the words "I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and bear true faith and allegience to the same." Nowhere in that oath do I see anything about "paying attention to foreign law". In my opinion, this statement by Sanda Day OâConner is treason, and should result in her immediate removal from our justice system, and deprived of any retirement she may have otherwise been entitled to. I donât remember foreign nations having any say in our laws, and I donât believe most Americans want to be judged by some half-wit from Brussels OR Beijing. This woman needs to be smacked upside the head a couple of times with a very LARGE cluebat. Ginsburg and Kennedy have both said similar things, and should be summarily removed as well. We, the people of this nation, are a free people, and do not submit to being ruled by any foreign power. These words state that we should.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-10-31 1:27:03 PM|| || Front Page|| [11145 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 "The impressions we create in this world are important, and they can leave their mark"

That mark should be the impression of the boot that kicks you off the court.

Posted by Steve 2003-10-31 1:37:45 PM|| 2003-10-31 1:37:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 The only thing the USSC needs to worry about is the whole "living constitution" malarkey. C'mon, folks, it's written in plain english, just read and understand. It's really not that complicated.

As for "foreign law", it's for foreigners.

Posted by mojo 2003-10-31 1:59:28 PM|| 2003-10-31 1:59:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Um, didn't we pretty much start this country with the notion that all the other guys were doing it wrong?

Posted by BH 2003-10-31 2:06:55 PM|| 2003-10-31 2:06:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Agreed OP. We need to make it painfully LOUD and clear that we the people will not tolerate being made subservient to foreign laws or any ruling that draws upon them. I will be lobbying congress appropriately.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2003-10-31 2:10:31 PM|| 2003-10-31 2:10:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Grounds for impeachment IMO.

Posted by someone 2003-10-31 2:28:09 PM|| 2003-10-31 2:28:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 OP, here's the oath of office I had to memorize for re-enlisting or promoting my Marines (I also have a copy in my wallet as my memory is sometimes not worth a crap):

I, (state your name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegience to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the uniform code of military justice. So help me God.

The oath of office for officers is slightly different. For officers they added the part that goes "I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of which I am about to enter."

She would do well to remind herself of that. Notice how no one screwed w/the word "God" in that oath.

Posted by Jarhead 2003-10-31 2:43:19 PM|| 2003-10-31 2:43:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 If I understand her US courts should pay more attention to "legal" decisions taken in Saudi Arabia, Sudan, North Korea or in assemblies where their ilk is majority (read the UN).

Despite not being an US citizen I would like to attract her attention to the fact that American judges are not free to choose the legislation they would like, they are required to enforce the laws voted by the representatives of the people of the United States, not foreign legislations dictated by foreign potentates.

Posted by JFM 2003-10-31 4:17:03 PM|| 2003-10-31 4:17:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 JFM, the foriegn precedent is a cannard that several of the justices used to throwout sodomy laws. Sounds like she is implying that we'll see more of the same (i.e. when there is nothing to support the position that you want to take in the actual, launch a fishing expedition through UN and EU quasi law to pind some backing.)

Posted by Super Hose 2003-10-31 5:29:36 PM|| 2003-10-31 5:29:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Here's the international law.

Rule Britiniaa (Freedom of the Seas)

Monroe Doctrine (Freedom from EU)

Code No-Napoleon (Freedom from Huey Long)

No-Moore (Freedom from morons.)

Posted by Shipman 2003-10-31 5:59:07 PM|| 2003-10-31 5:59:07 PM|| Front Page Top

12:16 Super Hose
11:49 Skidmark
11:41 Skidmark
11:34 Grom the Affective
11:33 Skidmark
11:11 trailing wife
11:11 Super Hose
11:08 Super Hose
11:07 Super Hose
11:06 Skidmark
11:01 Skidmark
11:00 Skidmark
10:59 Super Hose
10:57 Matt
10:55 Super Hose
10:49 trailing wife
10:26 Grom the Affective
10:25 DarthVader
10:23 Seeking Cure For Ignorance
10:22 Procopius2k
10:17 Super Hose
10:16 NN2N1
10:10 Skidmark
10:01 Skidmark