Monday, April 25, 2005
No controlling authority?
law.com - Article: "Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on Thursday dismissed growing criticism about the Supreme Court's use of international law in its opinions, saying it makes sense for justices to look at foreign sources when a point of law is unclear.
O'Connor, a Reagan appointee, participated in a lively one-hour discussion at the National Archives with Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen G. Breyer. She said if there is no controlling U.S. precedent or the viewpoint of states is unsettled, 'of course we look at foreign law.' "
Sounds like Al Gore's defense.
Hey, perhaps a look to the Constitution and our own history would be useful, Justice O'Connor. Wouldn't that be more important than looking to France (where there is no commonlaw tradition and past court decisions have no value as controlling authority) or the Netherlands (where euthanizing the aged is state sanctioned). These foreign nations are not federal systems; they have no states and they do not have the protections found in our Constitution. Read the next post from earlier today.
O'Connor, a Reagan appointee, participated in a lively one-hour discussion at the National Archives with Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen G. Breyer. She said if there is no controlling U.S. precedent or the viewpoint of states is unsettled, 'of course we look at foreign law.' "
Sounds like Al Gore's defense.
Hey, perhaps a look to the Constitution and our own history would be useful, Justice O'Connor. Wouldn't that be more important than looking to France (where there is no commonlaw tradition and past court decisions have no value as controlling authority) or the Netherlands (where euthanizing the aged is state sanctioned). These foreign nations are not federal systems; they have no states and they do not have the protections found in our Constitution. Read the next post from earlier today.
// posted by Zerin Hood @ 10:22 AM 
