Cheers!
Posted on 07/30/2010 2:14:39 PM PDT by goldendays
Ginsburg: OK to look to foreign law for good ideas
(AP) 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." Ginsburg acknowledged that other justices, including Antonin Scalia, are sharp critics of the use of foreign law in Supreme Court decisions. Still, she predicted the high court will continue to look to courts in other democracies for occasional help.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
In the Eu birthright citizenship is not allowed.
Lets start with that one.
The Constitution is not a recipe.
Hey Gins, if you and your ilk like foreign laws so much, move there. For you, I think Iran would be a winner.
To me, the biggest question is a short one — “why”?
Why do we need to look for foreign laws for “ideas”, when our judges are supposed to apply our American laws and interpret the U.S. Constitution? Why do they need “ideas” to help them interpret and apply our laws?
Does Ruthie mean that we look to foreign countries laws for liberal leaning legal concepts? For example, I understand that Saudi Arabia incorporates the Koran and Sharia Law into their civil laws. Certainly Ruthie doesn’t want to look there for “ideas” does she????
Did they cut out her gizzard or her frontal lobes ~ ? I keep forgetting that, not that it'd make any difference.
She thinks she should be writing the laws now?
Yes, I think a full burka would suit her well.
If we’re going to look across space, why not time as well? I’m starting to think a few witch trials may be in order.
Hell, the Supreme Court has ALREADY DONE IT! They even admitted that they looked at “foreign laws” when they were considering several cases. If the Republicans had an ounce of spine among them, they would have immediately those judges and thrown them out of the SC.
It’s OK to look at foreign laws. For Congress to do when making new US laws, but not for the Supreme Court, whose job is to enforce the US Constitution, and laws made in accordance with it.
It’s OK to look at foreign laws. For Congress to do when making new US laws, but not for the Supreme Court, whose job is to enforce the US Constitution, and laws made in accordance with it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/941589/posts
Justice Breyer: U. S. Constitution should be subordinated to international will
Thank you. You can go back to your nap now, Ruthie!
She has no idea what the Constitution is, or what the role of the Supremes is.
Like many people these days.
That’s rich,
And what was it the Romans did to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburgs kind?
Soooo, let’s look on other countries habits?
She may have something there. For example, maybe we should look at Mexico’s laws regarding the prosecution of illegal aliens in THEIR country.
But President Obama said we are now world citizen
Which foreign countries? North Korea? Haiti? Myanmar? Iran? Sudan?
Obama official led Soros ‘fund’ supporting world government
Sought more U.N. helmets on U.S. soldiers, membership in International Criminal Court
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=185013
You are right (a guy has to be quick around here!).
She improperly believes the judiciary is in the “idea” business.
In fact, they are in the “What does the law say?” business.
Perhaps at the most, “What did the lawmakers intend with this language?”
Where else could she look? In the constitution?
Text - Obama’s Speech to the United Nations General Assembly ...
Sep 23, 2009 ... The following is a text of President Obama’s speech to the United ... No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. ..... “We have learned,” he said, “to be citizens of the world, ...
It’s just fine for legislators to look at a law in some foreign country and say, “Hey that might work here.” For a judge to say, “France has such and such law, so therefore our law is now the same” is legal adultery.
I sure don’t think I should be making French or German law, so I don’t know why judges think the French or Germans should be making our laws. Heck, probably the French and German don’t want it either.
Our system may not be perfect, but it is well ahead of anything else in the world, and I don’t see the need to review international/foreigh/sharia or any other law.
...because foreign law allows things the Constitution never would. But if one can try to cirmumvent the Constitution using other legal systems and terminology, in order to fool everyday Americans, at least those who may care.
Our system may not be perfect, but it is well ahead of anything else in the world, and I don’t see the need to review international/foreign/sharia or any other law.
Cheers!
Incompetent and dangerous to occupy lifetime seats
Impeachment time for Ginsburg. Sotormayor should follow. These aren’t judicial minds, they’re fakes.
If he actually said those words, then it's treason as far as I'm concerned. The rest of the world wants us subordinated because the rulers of it don't want to be knocked off their perch by us or liberated citizens of their own countries.
NH Sen. Gregg is fifth Republican to support Kagan
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS (AP) – 1 hour ago WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. Judd Gregg says he plans to vote to confirm Elena Kagan as a Supreme Court justice. The retiring senator from New Hampshire says Kagan is qualified to serve on the high court, although she may have a different political philosophy than he does.
Gregg's announcement in a statement Friday makes him the fifth Republican to break with his party and back President Barack Obama's nominee.
He says confirmation should be based on qualifications, not ideological litmus tests or political affiliation.
The Senate plans a vote next week on Kagan, and majority Democrats have more than enough votes to confirm her. She's in line to succeed retired Justice John Paul Stevens
US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer: A Presentation on International Law
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5zaImTF92g
US Should Yield to Intl Law Says Supreme Court ...
4 min - Apr 13, 2009 - Uploaded by NYredwhiteandblue
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Argues Foreign Laws Should Have Influence On American Laws. Hey, I have a ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URLAx9fECGQ
Look to foreign laws for good ideas.
Who defines good? Abortion is illegal in in many countries, slavery is allowed in others, stoning, dismemberment... where do these good ideas stop?
If only we had a document of our own that set limits on our government...
Especially if a judge can pick and choose which foreign country.
I was thinking more along the lines of female circumcision. That would smarten her up.
We don’t have a Judicial Branch anymore; we have an Executive and two Legislative Branches.
I was on loan to the blue helmets for a while when I was in S. Korea.
Seems like forever ago.
What a bunch of dumbasses.
Hell, I do not think the could successfully take on the Hells Angels much less the worlds bad guys.
No, they can’t. It’s totally irrelevant. Judges don’t need ideas about foreign law - they simply need to evaluate the legality and applicability of laws passed by our state legislatures and the Congress based upon the Constitution. End of story.
That would constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
For the practitioner.
Cheers!
Cheers!
go back to sleep...
RBG has never thought the US Constitution matters for much. She does not agree with it. Her ideology prefers foreign over domestic.
If we had a Congress that was worth a s##t, that would be sufficient grounds for his impeachment.
I hate being so profane, but I'm just so damn sick and tired of the regime and all the useful idiots surrounding them.
Hello Ruth , I’m a somewhat competant rube from Va. and no!! you should not use foriegn law for any decisions based in the United States of America.
Tyrants should fear for their personal safety. Most of our Congress and Scotus qualify.
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.