home > archive > 2003 > this article

America's European Supreme Court

By Paul Walfield
web posted August 18, 2003

By now most everyone is aware of the left's desire to have their views on just about everything be referred to as "progressive." They even call themselves, "progressive." What is interesting is not just why, as that is obvious; after all, if their ideas are progressive, everyone else's opposing ideas must be….

What is most interesting is what the left passes off as "progressive," and what kind of intestinal fortitude it must take to not only come up with their ideas, but also justify them. It appears that liberals have been doing quite well in finding ways of positioning themselves in the judiciary, the media, college faculties, and in political office. But what is not so obvious, at least until just recently is the liberals understanding that they are in a small minority and quite unable to affect the changes they want by simply explaining what they want and why.

Most Americans aren't in any frame of mind to accept, let alone buy what the left is selling. That being the case, the left has stepped back from pushing for referendums, and instead is indoctrinating our children to their ideals in universities and thereby prepping them to accept the left's notions in an effort to stem the outrage that would ordinarily follow a judicial decision that goes against not only the Constitution, but common sense

The Supreme Court of the United States is the Court of last resort. Once they decide on a subject, that's it, it becomes the law of the land and there is virtually nothing that can be done short of a constitutional amendment to change their ruling. Now, it appears even that slim option is no longer available.

Not that there can be no more amendments to the constitution mind you, but it appears that the constitution of the United States is not the only thing that governs the highest court in America. For most of America, that may come as a shock. For most of us, it has always been understood that the sole function of the U.S. Supreme Court was to determine if the law or subject in question was "constitutional."

Not anymore. While many of us remember being taught about the seminal 1803 case of Marbury vs. Madison from which the Supreme Court became an equal branch of government, it now appears that the Court wishes to become not just the "arbiter of the Constitution," but the maker of laws, which in themselves are in effect "amendments" to the constitution as they bear little resemblance to the original document.

The majority of justices have decided, in the words of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, "are becoming more open to comparative and international law perspectives," adding, "Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change." Five of America's nine top justices agree with her. They said so in their decisions regarding the Texas law that banned homosexual acts and in the death penalty case involving mentally challenged individuals. Only three Justices of the Supreme Court still believe that it is American law that should govern Americans.

Justice Antonin Scalia has said that it is not the function or duty of the highest court in the land to "impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans." Yet, that is exactly what is happening. What is most interesting though is which "foreign moods," are considered necessary to impose on Americans. Islamic law which is taught to well over one billion of the earths inhabitants certainly isn't considered fashionable enough. Nor is the laws of Africa and most of Asia. If there is any doubt, check out how they feel about the death penalty or homosexual acts.

No, the "progressives" on the Supreme Court according to the New York Times, chose to "consult" with French president Jacques Chirac about the death penalty in July 2003. It would logically follow that the "progressives," prefer the attitudes and mores of the elitist west Europeans rather than the rest of the planet, including the majority of people in the United States.

What is particularly troubling is not that the "progressives" on the Supreme Court have forgotten what their job description is and are pursuing their own agenda, nor is it particularly troubling that they are now openly expressing their dissatisfaction with only having the constitution as their sole benchmark in determining the legality of various laws and actions.

What is so troubling is the fact that the rest of the government, the rest of the population is allowing them to continue their "progressive" activities and no one is calling for impeachment hearings. In fact, the craziest part of it all is that Californians, not exactly a bastion of conservative ideology, have demanded and gotten a recall election of their governor because they believe he is not performing satisfactorily in the job he has.

But the rest of America sits idly by while the "progressives" on the United States Supreme Court decide how Americans should conduct themselves based on what the French think.

Paul Walfield is a freelance writer and an attorney with an undergraduate degree in Psychology and post-graduate study in behavioral and analytical psychology. He resided for a number of years in the small town of Houlton, Maine and is now practicing law and writing political commentary. Paul has his own website at www.usanewsandviews.com.

Printer friendly version
Printer friendly version
Send a link to this page!
Send a link to this story




Printer friendly version Send a link to this page!


Get weekly updates about new issues of ESR!
e-mail:
Subscribe
Unsubscribe

 

Home

1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.