Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ginsburg: OK to look to foreign law for good ideas
Associated Press ^ | July 30, 2010

Posted on 07/30/2010 1:48:19 PM PDT by reaganaut1

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says judges can look to foreign law for good ideas without diminishing their ability to apply U.S. law faithfully.

Ginsburg told a meeting of international lawyers Friday that American judges can learn from their foreign counterparts when seeking solutions to "trying questions."

Ginsburg said high court nominee Elena Kagan got it right when she told senators at her confirmation hearing that she was in favor of good ideas "wherever you can get them."

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: ginsburg; ruthbaderginsburg
Our LEGISLATORS can look at foreign laws and practices for "good ideas", but our JUDGES are supposed to interpret OUR laws, not MAKE them.

Meanwhile, our almost useless "opposition" party is going to collaborate in confirming Kagan, who I'm sure agrees with Ginsburg.

1 posted on 07/30/2010 1:48:24 PM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Here’s my good idea Justice Ginsberg -

APPLY THE US CONSTITUTION AS WRITTEN! PERIOD!!!


2 posted on 07/30/2010 1:52:03 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
So...it should also be OK for the American people to choose to obey a foreign law in lieu of a domestic law if we think it's a good idea...right?
3 posted on 07/30/2010 1:53:48 PM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

No legislation without representation.

If they insist on going down this route, the SC should be elected every two years.

Which I am guessing won’t meet with their approval.


4 posted on 07/30/2010 1:55:15 PM PDT by texmexis best (My)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Argus

Dear Ginsberg,

Read my tagline.

It was and is a good idea.


5 posted on 07/30/2010 1:55:38 PM PDT by EBH (Our First Right...."it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

THIS is the kind of baggage that’s going to doom Gingrich’s chance to be President. The image if him and Nancy sitting on the couch is etched into my memory and I can’t get it out.


6 posted on 07/30/2010 1:58:38 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

NO you unqualified twit!

The U.S. Constitution is THE ONLY document you are authorized to consult!
For perspective, read the Federalist Papers.


7 posted on 07/30/2010 1:58:53 PM PDT by G Larry (Democrats: expediting the Destruction of America, before they lose power...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

How about we try Saudi law for a while and we can start by throwing homosexuals off buildings!

Ginzburg never impressed me with her modicum of wisdom, that’s for sure.


8 posted on 07/30/2010 2:02:26 PM PDT by Titus-Maximus (Light from Light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Ginsburg and Kagan are two peas in a pod!

Ginsburg’s flaw is that she doesn’t see any exceptionalism in the history of the US and the perfection of our legal system compared to any other on the planet. (Very much like Obama). She views the middle east as a place to “learn from” as well as Communist Cuba and Russia. She is a deluded, non-thinking Progressive who does not believe in Moral Absolutes but bows down to false gods. Her reasoning is twisted and she believes in the power of the State to impose her type of (non) reasoning on the masses. The State knows what is best for the individual.....oh, that “common good” and end justifies the means cr*p.


9 posted on 07/30/2010 2:02:36 PM PDT by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
I can understand this with some big IFs.

IF the Constitution has no say on the subject
IF the law has no say on the subject
IF stare decisis has no say on the subject
IF orbiter dicta has no say on the subject
THEN you can look to foreign sources non-binding inspiration as long as those sources do not disagree with any of the above.

We are a common-law country, which means the courts are allowed to make law.

10 posted on 07/30/2010 2:05:51 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

NO you unqualified twit!

I think she has dementia. Can they make a SCJ step down if they have dementia? If so, she has it.


11 posted on 07/30/2010 2:06:38 PM PDT by Bitsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
This woman needs to be impeached for that statement.

Her former colleague Sandra Day O'Connor said pretty much the same thing.

And WHO is to determine WHAT foreign laws should be looked at for “good ideas”???

Perhaps a Muslim Supreme Court Judge in the future - GO HELP US - would choose to review Saudi Laws and Sharia practices.

What this woman and her former colleague is stating is what many statists and globalists have felt for some time.

When you reject the uniqueness of America and its political system - which really IS unique as any serious student of history can tell you, than any old law anywhere on the globe is relevant to our society.

I hate these creatures like Bader_Ginsburg more than anyone can imagine, but the REAL villains here are the shallow-minded Americans who helped put the creature who nominated her into the Oval Office, who continue to elect the same gutless serial career office holding criminals who approve people like her, who stand by and allow comments like this to go unpunished.

And this regard, the GOP is as culpable as the Democrats.
They allowed ONE judge who thinks just like this miscreant - Soto-Mayor, to be appointed, and are about to allow another, Kagan, to be put on the bench. They do this without a whimper, without a complaint, with a hint or suggestion of a threatened filibuster.

Congress needs to be cleaned out even more than the Oval Office. Replace all those over-compensated and over-perked elitists with decent patriotic Americans and the Marxist in the White House will be powerless to harm us.

12 posted on 07/30/2010 2:06:46 PM PDT by ZULU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

HUH??? HUH???

There is no precedent relative to Sharia Law.

The Courts are NOT empowered to make law in America.

What on earth are you saying?????


13 posted on 07/30/2010 2:09:27 PM PDT by ZULU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Our Constitution has all the “good ideas” needed.


14 posted on 07/30/2010 2:12:58 PM PDT by MontanaBeth (Born Conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Hello?


15 posted on 07/30/2010 2:15:00 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Oh, never mind.


16 posted on 07/30/2010 2:17:08 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

We could look to Mexico for inspiration WRT immigration laws, give’em a dose of their own medicine.


17 posted on 07/30/2010 2:17:53 PM PDT by Spirochete (Just say NO to RINOs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
The founders - and thousands since then - have left the sometimes unjust laws of their homeland to LEGALLY migrate to America in search for freedom.

A little set of rules, called the Constitution was drawn up to provide for liberty and freedom.

A Supreme Court was set up to INTERPRET those rules.

Now this bug-eyed bitch thinks we should consult "foreign law".

It's a stretch of the imagination to think America has fallen this far.
18 posted on 07/30/2010 2:18:06 PM PDT by FrankR (It doesn't matter what they call us, only what we answer to....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
The Courts are NOT empowered to make law in America. What on earth are you saying?????

Read up on common law. It is more limited in our system than would be in a pure common law system because the courts have to defer to statutory law, and exhaust it, before resorting to common law implementation. Fair Use in copyright is an example. Statutory law was not specific on the issue, and it remained common law for decades (relying on "progress of the arts and sciences") before it became part of statutory law.

19 posted on 07/30/2010 2:20:16 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

The same Ginsburg who wrote a paper in support of lowerng the age of consent for sex between an adult and a minor to 11 yers old.


20 posted on 07/30/2010 2:20:32 PM PDT by stockpirate ("......When the government fears the people you have liberty." Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA
"...THIS is the kind of baggage that’s going to doom Gingrich’s chance to be President..."

Ahh, I think that you might have missed something here...

21 posted on 07/30/2010 2:22:09 PM PDT by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Such a statement ought to be grounds for impeachment. As the Declaration of Independence said about George III, “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws...”


22 posted on 07/30/2010 2:24:09 PM PDT by omega4412
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

OMG!


23 posted on 07/30/2010 2:25:51 PM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
Heeeeerrrrrssssseeeee Ginsburg!!!!....
24 posted on 07/30/2010 2:33:54 PM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

TREASON!


25 posted on 07/30/2010 2:34:54 PM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

As a woman, I have to wholeheartedly say, “No more women on the Supreme Court.”

For some reason, guys just can’t pick sane women to judge at the highest level.


26 posted on 07/30/2010 2:35:10 PM PDT by huldah1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Titus-Maximus
How about we try Saudi law for a while and we can start by throwing homosexuals off buildings!

That would be difficult as San Francisco would run out of buildings. At least we can require Justice Ginzburg to wear a burka all the time.


27 posted on 07/30/2010 3:02:57 PM PDT by magooey (The Mandate of Heaven resides in the hearts of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

The prospect of American Courts deferring to foreign laws and customs in rendering decisions which impact our life is so chilling, so alien and so evil that any measures whatsoever to frustrate this are acceptable.

And I think Sam Adams, George Washington and Thomas Paine would agree.


28 posted on 07/31/2010 11:35:57 AM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
The prospect of American Courts deferring to foreign laws and customs in rendering decisions which impact our life is so chilling, so alien and so evil that any measures whatsoever to frustrate this are acceptable. And I think Sam Adams, George Washington and Thomas Paine would agree.

Actually, in those early days we often looked to British court because our courts hadn't built up much precedent. And we still do it. The recent McDonald majority decision cited Blackstone, a British judge who died around the time of our revolution, on the issue of the right to self defense.

29 posted on 07/31/2010 2:41:23 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Bitsy

NO you unqualified twit!

Oh, does that make you a qualified twit?


30 posted on 08/02/2010 6:16:28 AM PDT by Bitsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Somehow, I don’t believe Bader-Ginsberg was thinking of Blackstone - or even Magna Carta.


31 posted on 08/02/2010 5:40:12 PM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson