• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internal Law

allsogreat

Active member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
495
Reaction score
148
Location
cultural center of the universe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Thread Title should read: "Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on International Law"

What is going on?....and where is it going?...lots of articles out concerning this....it's getting scary...H

Constitution takes hit from Supreme Court
Citing unapproved treaty is 'act of most fundamental reordering of legal system'

Posted: May 18, 2010

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

"The fundamentals of the U.S. Constitution possibly have been shoved one step closer to irrelevance by the U.S. Supreme Court, which yesterday cited as support for its opinion an international treaty that has not been adopted in the U.S. "



A flap over foreign matter at the Supreme Court
By Tom Curry
National affairs writer

"WASHINGTON - Stepping into a battle between the liberal and conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, Republican House members are protesting the court’s increasing use of foreign legal precedents in interpreting the Constitution."
 
Last edited:

jujuman13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Thread Title should read: "Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on International Law"

What is going on?....and where is it going?...lots of articles out concerning this....it's getting scary...H

Constitution takes hit from Supreme Court
Citing unapproved treaty is 'act of most fundamental reordering of legal system'

Posted: May 18, 2010

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

"The fundamentals of the U.S. Constitution possibly have been shoved one step closer to irrelevance by the U.S. Supreme Court, which yesterday cited as support for its opinion an international treaty that has not been adopted in the U.S. "



A flap over foreign matter at the Supreme Court
By Tom Curry
National affairs writer

"WASHINGTON - Stepping into a battle between the liberal and conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, Republican House members are protesting the court’s increasing use of foreign legal precedents in interpreting the Constitution."
It might be argued that foreign legal precedents make more sense than do the home grown variety?
 

Yossarian

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
258
Reaction score
121
Location
Sydney, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It might be argued that foreign legal precedents make more sense than do the home grown variety?
In my opinion, US courts looking to other common law countries for judicial reasoning is a positive step because it can allow for fresh perspective on contentious legal issues when they arise. I'm not saying that foreign decisions are necessarily precedential, but I think it is worth noting them at least.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Considering our legal system (with the exception of Louisiana) is almost a wholesale transplant of the British legal system, I'm not opposed to citing foreign or international law in certain circumstances. Interpreting "cruel and unusual punishment" is a perfect example of when it would be appropriate. Obviously the language in the amendment was intentionally left vague so that judges could apply it to their own era. But "cruel and unusual" compared to whom? At the federal level, the only basis for comparison can be other countries. Therefore it's appropriate IMO.
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I wasn't aware the Supreme Court as a whole body rendered an explanation of its opinion. I thought each Judge wrote a dissent or support for a ruling after the matter had been voted on, so wouldn't the citing of international law only be part of one judges opinion? Or am I mistaken?
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I wasn't aware the Supreme Court as a whole body rendered an explanation of its opinion. I thought each Judge wrote a dissent or support for a ruling after the matter had been voted on, so wouldn't the citing of international law only be part of one judges opinion? Or am I mistaken?
Generally, one justice writes the opinion for the majority and one justice writes the dissenting opinion. However, if other justices agree with the majority (or the dissent) but disagree with the reasoning behind it, they can write their own opinion. If they don't, it's usually a safe assumption that they agree with the reasoning for whichever side of the case they voted for.
 

allsogreat

Active member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
495
Reaction score
148
Location
cultural center of the universe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

It might be argued that foreign legal precedents make more sense than do the home grown variety?
It would seem to me, based on my limited knowledge of the law and constitution, that any decision rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court, should be based on current local, state, or federal law, and, whether or not it complies with the U.S. Constitution. Even in the event that the Justices disagree with the law. For the Supreme Court to render any decision based on what any Judge in any foreign country ruled, would, in my eyes diminish the effectiveness of the U.S. Constitution. Decisions made by the U.S. Supreme Court should not be based on personal preferences, but on American law and it's compliance with the U.S. Constitution.
 
Last edited:

Alvin T. Grey

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
839
Reaction score
203
Location
Dublin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

Who is the arbiter of what is and isn't constitutional?

It's the SCOTUS isn''t it?

So what is this about then?
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,490
Reaction score
50,037
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

Who is the arbiter of what is and isn't constitutional?

It's the SCOTUS isn''t it?

So what is this about then?

Not exclusively. The Congress has the almost-never-used capacity to limit the SCOTUS purview. The President can, and in the past one has, appointed "extra" Justices to offset an existing balance that he didn't like.

The Constitution is the highest law of the land. As long as SCOTUS is simply making decisions about existing law based on Constitutionality, fine. When they start departing from their job description and either making decisions based on non-Constitutional sources or **** they made up on the spur of the moment, they need to be smacked.
 

Alvin T. Grey

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
839
Reaction score
203
Location
Dublin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

But I thought that any consideration the SCOTUS made was by their existance constitutional? Hence the bipartizan confirmation, the lifelong appointments etc. And as far as decisions based on others, how is that different from decisions arrived at yourself. Does the simple fact of geography make it a bad decision, and as such prevent you from considering it?

Because thats just silly.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,490
Reaction score
50,037
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

But I thought that any consideration the SCOTUS made was by their existance constitutional? Hence the bipartizan confirmation, the lifelong appointments etc. And as far as decisions based on others, how is that different from decisions arrived at yourself. Does the simple fact of geography make it a bad decision, and as such prevent you from considering it?

Because thats just silly.
SCOTUS is not an absolute dictator of what is constitutional; they can be challenged, though it is rarely done.

As for geography, that isn't the problem. European nations, for example, have very different traditions, history, customs, laws, and concepts about government, citizenship, and rights, than is the case in America. Looking to legal precedents from overseas, in most cases, would be like Britain looking to China for legal precedent.

We do things differently here, and most of us do not desire to emulate European ways or the ways of any other nation.
 

Alvin T. Grey

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
839
Reaction score
203
Location
Dublin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

Even if it's a good decision?
 

allsogreat

Active member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
495
Reaction score
148
Location
cultural center of the universe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

Even if it's a good decision?

What may seem like a "good decision" to some folks, still may not be Constitutional. If even one of the Supreme Court Justices base his decision on a Foreign Law, Foreign Precedent, or just a "good idea" that does not comply with U.S. law and the U.S. Constitution, then he / she has made a BAD Decision.....there is a reason we have a Constitution......
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

What may seem like a "good decision" to some folks, still may not be Constitutional. If even one of the Supreme Court Justices base his decision on a Foreign Law, Foreign Precedent, or just a "good idea" that does not comply with U.S. law and the U.S. Constitution, then he / she has made a BAD Decision.....there is a reason we have a Constitution......
You make it sound so depressing. You could make an argument that the Consitution blocking "good decisions" may be better in the long run because it acts as a check against populus and too rapid change. If we assume that the SCOTUS is conservative in its intrepretations and we assume the current Consitution is a good thing, although not the best because times change. Then we force ourselves to go through the lengthy Consitutional amendment process so we all collectivly can make sure we really want to go through with that change so we don't make sweeping and rapid gov't changes with the same amount of thought that we use to pick tiolet paper. So in other words it acts as a stabalizer to prevent "hipster politcs" where things change as fast as fashion trends and no one can get anything done in an ever changing mess.
 

allsogreat

Active member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
495
Reaction score
148
Location
cultural center of the universe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

I think I agree with pretty much every thing you said.

You make it sound so depressing.
Not "depressing" at all......what is/would be depressing is if the U.S. Supreme Courts failed to comply with the Constitution.

You could make an argument that the Consitution blocking "good decisions" may be better in the long run because it acts as a check against populus and too rapid change.
Yes....even if a decision is popular to the "masses" that does not necessarily make it a good decision over the long term. The authors of the Constitution recognized that changes may become necessary and included provisions for change.

If we assume that the SCOTUS is conservative in its intrepretations and we assume the current Consitution is a good thing, although not the best because times change.
All decisions, in my opinion, should be conservative....changing times does not negate the Constitution.

Then we force ourselves to go through the lengthy Consitutional amendment process so we all collectivly can make sure we really want to go through with that change so we don't make sweeping and rapid gov't changes with the same amount of thought that we use to pick tiolet paper.
Couldn't have said it better myself.

So in other words it acts as a stabalizer to prevent "hipster politcs" where things change as fast as fashion trends and no one can get anything done in an ever changing mess.
Now you are good....Best response I've seen on here to any thread in a long time....Thanks....Harv
 
Last edited:

Alvin T. Grey

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
839
Reaction score
203
Location
Dublin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

What may seem like a "good decision" to some folks, still may not be Constitutional. If even one of the Supreme Court Justices base his decision on a Foreign Law, Foreign Precedent, or just a "good idea" that does not comply with U.S. law and the U.S. Constitution, then he / she has made a BAD Decision.....there is a reason we have a Constitution......
Eh......Supreme court decisions are basied on the constitution, thats the yardstick they have to use. Seeing that they are the ones tasked with the interpretation of any law with respect to the constitution their judgement may or may not be constitutional....in your opinion. But that doesn't matter does it.
The question remains that if a decision is reached and judged in line with the US constitution, should that decision be overturned, if it did not arise in the United States? What makes it any less valid?
Is it because its incorrect, or is it because it's foregin?

If it's the latter, then the whole idea of the OP is insane.
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

I think I agree with pretty much every thing you said.
I'm not sure I exactly agree with what I wrote, I just thought it was interesting legal theory.
 

Alvin T. Grey

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
839
Reaction score
203
Location
Dublin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

All decisions, in my opinion, should be conservative....changing times does not negate the Constitution.
You are kidding right?
Changing times allow the constitution to grow. Thats why the amendment process exists.
 

allsogreat

Active member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
495
Reaction score
148
Location
cultural center of the universe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Re: Are Supreme Court Decisions to be based on Internationall Law

You are kidding right?
Changing times allow the constitution to grow. Thats why the amendment process exists.
Wasn't kidding. Either I was unclear or you mis-read my response...."changing times does not negate the Constitution".....Changing times may cause our legislatures to attempt a change....but that does not mean it should, or could happen until the votes are counted....... I also said "The authors of the Constitution recognized that changes may become necessary and included provisions for change."
 
Top Bottom