Posted on 05/25/2010 5:46:36 AM PDT by opentalk
Solicitor General Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court should founder unless she adequately explains why she quite literally put "International/ Comparative Law" ahead of the U.S. Constitution. Senators should question Ms. Kagan in great depth about her views on the applicability of foreign law in American courts.
Increasing references to international laws and norms in American courts have become controversial in recent years, and deservedly so.
...In a New Hampshire speech on Oct. 6, 2008, then-Dean Kagan referred to "a transnational perspective" as being "foundational" as "part of the core of legal thought and activity in this new century." The academic jargon is instructive: "Transnationalism" is, in the words of radical State Department counsel Harold Koh, the idea that "domestic courts must play a key role in coordinating U.S. domestic constitutional rules with rules of foreign and international law."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
So what? Orrin Hatch loves her.
she will promote a communist agenda.
The problem is, that Justice Kennedy used foreign law in the decision released JUST LAST WEEK, in which he wrote a majority opinion. (the case about life in prison for juveniles)
And Sandra Day O’Conner cited it in the past, too!
blah...
Kagan might choose Arlen as her intern. They can consult on Scottish law.
If you read the transcript of Kagan’s comments during the Citizen’s United case before the USSC you will see that Kennedy had to school her on exactly what the case was about. She had it WRONG and he was not amused.
The transcript, even in the reading, was quite telling.
omg
she hates free speech and thinks foreign law trumps the Constitution?
Geesh
and the chance she will be confirmed is 99.9%
It ought to be possible to impeach a Supreme Court Justice. And referencing anything other than the US Constitution in a decision or a dissent ought to be an impeachable offense. We are sovereign.
I agree, seems this is exactly what Obama (machine) wants. Control of the courts.—total transformation
I couldn’t agree with you more!
When I hear this kind of crap, I’d just like to rip my hair out....seriously.
Our Constitution is, essentially, the rulebook for everyone. The rules of the road, the rules of the game. Everyone knows what they are, going in, making it fair to all.
Imagine running a sporting event the way these turkeys run the SCOTUS:
A batter is at the plate, and the count is 3-2. The next pitch is head high; the batter starts for first base. But...the umpire calls him back, saying “Son, in the Indonesian league, it takes 5 pitches out of the zone in order to earn a base on balls.” Can you imagine the look on that batter’s face?
Or, perhaps a football team is heading down the field trying to score a field goal, to send a game into overtime via a tie. After the field goal is kicked, the scoreboard is turned off and the PA announcer tells everyone to drive home safely. Everyone is standing around, bewildered, until the referee clears it up: In Spanish football, field goals are worth 4 points, so we have a winner, not a tie. Now we have a coach, picture a Mike Ditka, running onto the field with his hair practically on fire, arguing. Mayhem.
This is what the court is doing, when it inserts international law into its decisions.
America is under attack - A piece by piece dismantling
Leftist judges have an agenda to implement.
They go into a case with the desired end result already decided,
and spend the bulk of the case finding justification wherever they can find it.
They will still elect her no matter what they come up with. This woman is scary beyond reproach and she will be in the class picture of 2011. D@mn all repubs who would vote for her!
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.