From the Blogosphere
September
Weapon of Choice,
InstaPundit, linked to this
article from the
Tech Central Station about the Supreme Court's usage of law and ideas from non-American sources and why the author thinks it is a bad idea.
Matt's Chat
My concern about this has always been that with all the emphasis being placed on international law, international treaties (including treaties that the US Senate has not ratified), etc. is that eventually these non-traditional legal sources will supercede American law and that the Constitution of the United States will no longer be the law of the land in the United States of America. I agree with the author in that it would appear that when judges don't agree with American law, they find ways to make their views in to law. That is not what the judicial branch is charged to do. And I find it reprehensible. I will expose such cases as I find them...
Mark's Remarks
Amen, Matt....does England follow American laws? Does Iran? Does even the UN follow its own precious international law? The United States is based on the Constitution, not arbitrary international law, to be the Supreme Law of the Land. It is reprehensible for any judge to weasel and scheme, especially to circumvent American law and values, for the sake of advancing an agenda.
