« What Kind of Commenter Are You? | Main | Breaking: Captain Phillips is Free »

It's time to commence impeachment hearings

Impeach Obama? No silly. Despite the disastrous course he's plotting for the US such a notion is premature. But there's one DC pol whose actions and words clear defy their oath of office - Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

At a recent symposium honoring her 15 years sitting on the Supreme Court, Ginsburg posited on conservatives opposing references to foreign legal decisions:

"I frankly don't understand all the brouhaha lately from Congress and even from some of my colleagues about referring to foreign law," Justice Ginsburg said in her comments on Friday.
Justice Ginsburg said the controversy was based on the misunderstanding that citing a foreign precedent means the court considers itself bound by foreign law as opposed to merely being influenced by such power as its reasoning holds.

"Why shouldn't we look to the wisdom of a judge from abroad with at least as much ease as we would read a law review article written by a professor?" she asked.

I'm no legal scholar, but let me take a stab. Any foreign court's reasoning will not, for obvious reasons, be based on the United States Constitution. Nor will it be based on US case law. Therefore whatever "wisdom" the foreign judge may have used in his "reasoning" is irrelevant in US courts.

In other words, Ginsburg is looking to poach justification for legal reasoning that runs counter to our Constitution from foreign judges whose decisions are based on a completely different set of underlying assumptions. When the Constitution that has served our great nation since 1789 runs counter to her underlying political beliefs she just looks to a foreign precedent and says, "See, they know better."

I suppose after fifteen years she's forgotten the words (According to Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code) she recited before taking her seat on the bench:

"I, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as Supreme Court Justice under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."
Of course, without years of legal training a layman like yours truly reads "the Constitution and laws of the United States" to mean just that. She should be impeached now before retiring from the bench so future nominees will understand that the SCOTUS is required to base their decisions on the laws of the US.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (15)

Thank God there is an op-ed... (Below threshold)
Liberal Hater:

Thank God there is an op-ed commentary that isn't afraid to say it like it is. Justice Ginsburg is a national disgrace and should not only be impeached but she should have never been confirmed in the first place.

No one, and I mean no one who works or has previously worked for the ACLU should ever be confirmed to a federal court, especially the Supreme Court.

And while were at it, John Paul Stevens, and David Souter should have never sat on the Supreme Court.

Any foreign court'... (Below threshold)
Anon Y. Mous:
Any foreign court's reasoning will not, for obvious reasons, be based on the United States Constitution. Nor will it be based on US case law. Therefore whatever "wisdom" the foreign judge may have used in his "reasoning" is irrelevant in US courts.

I think she would respond that when teasing out those penumbras, it can be very useful to consult the imaginations of her simpatico international brethren.

Any foreign court's reasoni... (Below threshold)

Any foreign court's reasoning will not, for obvious reasons, be based on the United States Constitution.

Therefore making it easier to reach a predetermined outcome more palatable to her liberal leanings. Just a 'nuanced' way of saying 'screw the law'.

And here's the real trick b... (Below threshold)

And here's the real trick behind the reasoning of these internationalists:

"Foreign Legal Decisions" allows the internationalists to cherry-pick choose the decisions they want to apply. No US person voted for those decisions to be applied to the US, either directly or through representative government. This moron wants to apply whatever she thinks is best for you, regardless of whether it is in the Constitution or has been passed by Congress as law.

Ok, everyone take a deep br... (Below threshold)

Ok, everyone take a deep breath. She gets impeached successfully and who appoints her successor? And how liberal are they likely to be?

Burn it at the stake.... (Below threshold)

Burn it at the stake.

"Ok, everyone take a dee... (Below threshold)

"Ok, everyone take a deep breath. She gets impeached successfully and who appoints her successor? And how liberal are they likely to be?"

You've made a good point, Epador. And considering Obama's past statements in regard to the Constitution, I think we know the answer to that question. I'm just waiting for when Ginsburg thinks is the most prudent time to announce her retirement without doing it too close to Obama's inauguration. She has a legacy she will want to protect and tarnishing it by being too obvious in waiting just until a liberal President can appoint her replacement is likely an important factor. I could be wrong, but I suspect she's timing it.

Impeachment on what grounds... (Below threshold)
James H:

Impeachment on what grounds? As nearly as I can tell, her chief offense is disagreeing with you on the law.

Speaking of respect for the... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Speaking of respect for the Constitution, since when did saying something,( in a speech, not a legal opinion,) that YOU disagree with, constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors?"

Calm down and take a breath indeed.

Correct as usual, Baron.</p... (Below threshold)

Correct as usual, Baron.

The U.S. of A. can't learn a thing from the legal opinions those damm foriegners. We should disallow any opinions based on foreign laws. Let's start with those Israeli laws, the Ten Commandments.

TIME TO IMPEACH BARACK OBMA... (Below threshold)


So am I assuming correctly ... (Below threshold)

So am I assuming correctly that Canadian law should have as much weight as Yemeni law, or is this just pick and choose the foreign legal decisions you like and ignore the ones you don't?

Wow, nice overreaction to a... (Below threshold)

Wow, nice overreaction to a non-issue. Judges use all kinds of external sources of wisdom for their rulings. None of it is binding on the SCOTUS, but it helps to avoid reinventing the wheel. I'd be more pissed if she was referring to the Bible for her opinions.

Scalia even states that foreign law has its uses in SCOTUS decision-making, though he's not a fan of its use in most circumstances:

Why wouldn't we look at the results of adopting a law in a country where they've already tried it? Or look at the legal system upon which ours is based for another's opinion? Why operate in a vacuum?

Justices cite anything and everything in their opinions, and lawyers are quite aware of what is binding and what is dicta (i.e., non-binding fluff). This is only offensive to the lay person who reads the above tabloid-esque portrayal of the issue.

Oh, and to joh - Yes... (Below threshold)

Oh, and to joh -
Yes, that's exactly what it is, take the good ideas from wherever and leave the rest. Their law means nothing here, but good reasoning is universal.

Guys, I am not for stringin... (Below threshold)

Guys, I am not for stringing her up on her opinion that she stated out of the courtroom. HOWEVER, it shows a distinctly disturbing trend that our justices today are weighing in case law based on foreign rulings. This country was founded based upon principles and beliefs unique in the entire world! We are a soveriegn nation! That is something to be proud of! We don't need to apologize for being America, and we don't need to cowtow to the rets of the world. WE have been the beacon of hope to the world, and to become more like the rest of the world continues to dim that light! We don't need the legal precendent of Europe to slowly leak into our judicial system. These judges need to interpret the US Constition and arbitrate cases between the citizens and the States. That their jobs, not to be a bully pulpit. They are part of the checks and balances set forth to prevent 1 party from destroying the greatest government ever established. The justices cannot do that which was intended in the Constituion by basing legal precedent on foreign law! End of Story.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy