As I predicted. And also, as I predicted, Mark Levin dedicated a lot of time to this on his radio show last night.
From the article, this is my biggest issue in a nutshell:
Perhaps the most troubling feature of Roper is that it extends the High Court's recent habit of invoking foreign opinion in order to overrule American laws. "It is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty," Justice Kennedy writes. We thought the Constitution was the final arbiter of U.S. law, but apparently that's passé.
If a court can selectively use "international law," or a "consensus" of foreign laws to change and/or overturn our own laws, why have a constitution at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment