|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Home | News | Commentary | Forum | The Loft | Online Activist | State News | Resources | Cartoons | Classifieds | Contact Us |
Other Columns by Kevin Fobbs
Using Foreign Law Is The Real Supreme Court TestBy Kevin Fobbs September 16, 2005 Page 3 of 4 Well, it has. As the U.S. Senators are going through their theatrics on Capitol Hill in Judge John Roberts' Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings, let's hope those senators who respect the Constitution understand that the most important question of the entire proceedings is not necessarily how he would decide on another "Roe v Wade" fact pattern. The most essential and fundamental answer we should want to hear from Judge John Roberts is "I firmly believe that as a matter of course and as a matter of law, the U.S. Supreme Court will only consider in its proceedings and legal determinations the U.S. Constitution, now and forever more. Any use of foreign laws and constitutions to interpret U.S. laws and our Constitution is a blatant violation of our U.S. Constitution...so help me God." That is the kind of response that the American people deserve and that is the legal position that our first Chief Justice John Marshall would have supported.
His first decision which gave the U.S. Supreme Court its foundation was based upon the notion of what legal determinations govern the Federal courts. In Marburg v. Madison, Chief Justice Marshall evoked the principle of judicial review. He felt that "A legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law." Judicial review was based upon American jurisprudence, and to do otherwise would again be simply repugnant to the principles of governance that "each branch of government is responsible (to the people) for keeping its own acts within the bounds of constitutionality." Chief Justice Marshall would have open disdain for any notion of using foreign law and foreign practices in determining American legal disputes. Open disdain for the Constitution is open disdain for the oath of office that the supreme court justices are sworn to uphold. If this trifecta of justices is allowed to continue to prevail the U.S. Supreme Court will be using a new global test in deciding American cases. If that be the case then perhaps their swearing in should not be held in Washington D.C. but in New York and their oath should be administered by United Nations General Secretary Kofi Anan. There you have it. A World Court, with a world oath, a global test and French law administered by an Aruban legal expert and appealed to a Saudi Arabian legal system that hands it off to a Cuban arbiter, who outlines it for the U.S. Supreme Court. It is a legal nightmare we cannot afford to wake up to. ---------- Kevin Fobbs is President of National Urban Policy Action Council (NuPac), a non-partisan civic and citizen-action organization that focuses on taking the politics out of policy to secure urban America's future one neighborhood, one city, and one person at a time. View NuPac on the web at www.nupac.info. Kevin Fobbs is a regular contributing columnist to the Detroit News. He is also Outreach Communications Vice Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party and daily host of The Kevin Fobbs Show on News Talk WDTK - 1400 AM in Detroit as well as co-founder of the Jackson, MI-based American Conservative Values Television Network. Listen to The Kevin Fobbs Show online at www.wdtkam.com daily 2-3 p.m., and call in toll-free nationwide to make your opinion count at 800-923-WDTK(9385).
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
 | |||
| |||
|
