Ruth Bader Ginsberg and her lack of respect for our constitution

For those interested in a postscript to one of the most dangerous times of our Republic, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Obama administration were prepared to sell out America to world government. Her view of our constitution should be a warning of what the coming election could bring us. More Supremes of her persuasion, and a government that has lost its respect for our constitution. From an earlier post:

Recall Justice Ginsburg has fired the latest salvo in the ongoing debate about the Court’s use of foreign and international law sources in constitutional adjudication.   On Friday, she gave a speech to the International Academy of Comparative Law at American University, entitled “A decent respect to the Opinions of [Human]kind”: The Value of a Comparative Perspective in Constitutional Adjudication.  Not surprisingly given her earlier opinions, Justice Ginsburg comes out strongly in favor of the Court’s use of foreign and international law materials to interpret U.S. law, including the Constitution.

She begins with an historical defense:

From the birth of the United States as a nation, foreign and international law influenced legal reasoning and judicial decision making.  Founding fathers, most notably, Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, were familiar with leading international law treatises, the law merchant, and English constitutional law.  And they used that learning as advocates in legal contests . . . . The law of nations, Chief Justice Marshall famously said in 1815, is part of the law of our land.  Decisions of the courts of other countries, Marshall explained, show how the law of nations is understood elsewhere, and will be considered in determining the rule which is to prevail here.  Those decisions, he clarified, while not binding authority for U. S. courts, merit respectful attention for their potential persuasive value.

After quoting from Paquete Habana, Ginsburg turns her attention to the hostility to both foreign and international law on display in the U.S. Senate during Elena Kagan’s recent confirmation hearings (e.g., including the Senator who indicated he was “troubled” that Kagan “believes we can turn to foreign law to get good ideas”).  She contrasts these exchanges with The Federalist’s use of the law of nations and both positive and negative examples from abroad to defend the Constitution.

In terms of her own views, Justice Ginsberg did not mince words:

On judicial review for constitutionality, my own view is simply this:  If U.S. experience and decisions may be instructive to systems that have more recently instituted or invigorated judicial review for constitutionality, so too can we learn from others now engaged in measuring ordinary laws and executive actions against fundamental instruments of government and charters securing basic rights. . . . The U.S. judicial system will be the poorer, I have urged, if we do not both share our experience with, and learn from, legal systems with values and a commitment to democracy similar to our own.

And the rest of the speech continues in a similar vein, with Justice Ginsberg raising and then contesting the views of foreign/international law opponents (including Justice Scalia, Judge Richard Posner, and Professors Eric Posner and Adrian Vermeule) while citing a series of “examples” of recent cases where the Court reached a decision with the aid of foreign and international law sources (e.g., Atkins v. Virginia, Lawrence v. Texas, Boumediene v. Bush, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, and, of course, Roper v. Simmons).

The most interesting part of the speech was Justice Ginsburg’s list of other sources besides foreign and international law that are appropriate for constitutional adjudication:

Judges in the United States, after all, are free to consult all manner of commentary — Restatements, Treatises, what law professors or even law students write copiously in law reviews, and, in the internet age, any number of legal blogs.  If we can consult those sources, why not the analysis of a question similar to the one we confront contained, for example, in an opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada, the Constitutional Court of South Africa, the German Constitutional Court, or the European Court of Human Rights?

Read more

For more see an earlier post as well:

Washington Examiner:

Justice Department attorneys are advancing an argument at the Supreme Court that could allow the government to invoke international treaties as a legal basis for policies such as gun control that conflict with the U.S. Constitution, according to Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

“If the administration is right, the treaty power could become a backdoor way for the federal government to do everything from abolishing the death penalty nationwide, to outlawing homeschooling, to dramatically curtailing the states’ rights to regulate abortion,” she told the Washington Examiner.

Their argument is that a law implementing an international treaty signed by the U.S. allows the federal government to prosecute a criminal case that would normally be handled by state or local authorities.

That is a dangerous argument, according to Cruz.

“The Constitution created a limited federal government with only specific enumerated powers,” Cruz told the Washington Examiner prior to giving a speech on the issue today at the Heritage Foundation.

“The Supreme Court should not interpret the treaty power in a manner that undermines this bedrock protection of individual liberty,” Cruz said.

In his speech, Cruz said the Justice Department is arguing “an absurd proposition” that “could be used as a backdoor way to undermine” Second Amendment rights, among other things.

Keep reading…

From an earlier post done in October, 2013

Ted Cruz: DOJ argues that International Treaties can trump Constitution

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

Secret Bilderberg Group Meeting Starts Today, just outside D.C.

Today is the start of the Bilderberg Conference. I can once again put on my tin foil proudly. Barely a ripple from the news media. Google did a fine job of scrubbing it from their search engine but then again, Schmidt will be at the meeting. One sentence from Drudge from InfoWars but I already had that one. One mention from Yahoo at the time I write this post. Fascinating isn’t it that 140 of the world’s leaders gather right outside of D.C. and not a ripple so far from the media. I gleaned a couple of points of interest. Bilderberg Meetings | The official website  is a place to start. I add this clip from the History Channel just for a refresher done in 2009.

BILDERBERG 2017 AGENDA, PARTICIPANTS REVEALED

Secretive globalist confab set to kick off Thursday

Then we get this positive spin:

“The White House is taking no chances, sending along some big hitters from Team Trump to defend their boss: the national security adviser, HR McMaster; the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross; and Trump’s new strategist, Chris Liddell. Could the president himself show up to receive his report card in person?

Henry Kissinger, the gravel-throated kingpin of Bilderberg, visited the White House a few weeks ago to discuss “Russia and other things”, and certainly, the Bilderberg conference would be the perfect opportunity for the most powerful man in the world to discuss important global issues with Trump.” More The Guardian

Then we have BILDERBERG ’17: WAR ON INFORMATION…    Russia’s take on it.

I will throw in a couple of tweets.

‘s Amb. to US is @ with US Commerce Sec, Nat. Security Advisor + 2 Senators. Logan Act anyone?

18h18 hours ago

Why the United States is giving away ownership of our Energy and Refineries

 

Yesterday my post was U.S. giving away ownership and control of our Energy and refineriesPaladin, who writes a great blog commented on the post, and it is worthy of a read. Pay him a visit if you haven’t done so. His response gives a succinct explanation of how we came to where we are. Where we are headed. Here we go:

The left’s grand idea to prevent WW III was to intertwine all of the key player’s economies so that could never happen because everybody would go broke. There are several outcomes from such a strategy, the first is that if one economy fails to thrive, all connected economies take a hit. This is why it is said that if the American economy has a cold, the rest of the world gets the flu. The flawed premise was that America’s economy would always be preeminent.

The second effect is a bit more subtle. As foreign influence grows, international policy becomes critical. This is why Obama’s foreign policy is so important. The fact that he basically doesn’t have one, is not good news. By being a follower and not a leader, Obama submits America to the will of her enemies by default. The third effect is massive corruption.

We have already seen the effect of such corruption with the collapse of the housing market in 2008. A collapse formed by the left holding a gun to the head of lenders and forcing them to make loans to people who could not pay them back. Banks sold these loans to investors who purchased insurance to limit risk and the rest is history. There were runs on commercial banks, but the public was kept calm and the consumer banks dodged a bullet. We began printing money around the clock in March of that year because the government saw what was coming and have never stopped. Flooding our economy with cash worked to calm fears initially, but economists believe that you cannot do so and avoid the consequence of run away inflation. While that has not happened yet, many believe that it is only a matter of time and that is why economic growth is slow as the economic shell game tries desperately to suck up all of that extra cash.

The fourth effect is overconfidence. Most in American government believe that our foreign co-conspirators, because the only way any of this works is with the cooperation of foreign powers, would never allow our economy to go belly up. If we go, they go. At least that is the thinking. But there may be ways around an economic collapse. The use of gold reserves for instance. Something that America no longer believes is necessary, but the Chinese and Russians still have. In fact, the Chinese have been buying gold steadily for years and hanging on to it. Could that mean that the Red Chinese would survive if the American economy collapses? Possibly. If the American economy implodes, the Red Chinese transition to the gold standard and possibly survive the chain reaction of economic collapse.

The untold story is that wealth is being created outside of the United States. As American assets are being carved up by foreign powers, the best and the brightest in those fields are going to work for them. American ownership of American resources is dwindling. And American citizens become beholden to foreign powers and not their own government. Who do you think these citizens will elect to that government? Will the public support policies that are not favorable to their employers? Why would a citizen care about something that he no longer has a vested interest in? That is the long range problem and one that terrifies the left when they consider the influence of capitalism, but not, strangely, when one trades the place of the capitalist with that of the foreign dictator.

As the foreign acquisition of American business continues to grow, so too does foreign influence on our government. Influence that may or may not have America’s best interests at heart. Such a circumstance does not see America as an equal, but as a resource to be tapped. Ultimately, that is the grave danger of foreign ownership and why colonialism failed. It’s just that in our case, there are no foreign troops. Although I would not be surprised to see such should the American economy fold.

We have never truly recovered economically from 9/11. While the loss of life was tragic, the economic damage was far worse. In short, we are very vulnerable economically right now. We spend like there is no tomorrow, and just wait until the medical bills begin to roll in from Obamacare. Cloward and Piven’s strategy is alive and well, and the aim is to crash the American economy to initiate governmental change by crisis.

There are a lot of pokers in the economic fire right now.

 

OBAMA Said The Day He’s Inaugurated Muslim Hostility Will Ease

A Saturday reflection. Recall our traitor’s words. But first, Cicero gives us the warning.

Cicero,  Roman statesman, lawyer, scholar, and writer who vainly tried to uphold republican principles in the final civil wars that destroyed the Roman Empire

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.”

Marcus Tullius Cicero, English byname Tully    (born 106 bce, Arpinum, Latium [now Arpino, Italy]—died Dec. 7, 43 bce, Formiae, Latium [now Formia]),

And we bought the traitor’s words.

OBAMA Said The Day He’s Inaugurated Muslim Hostility Will Ease.

Biden: ‘We must create a New World Order’

 

Biden: The ‘affirmative task’ before us is to ‘create a new world order’

So we have to make sure the world including China succeeds.  This man wants to be the next President. Think about it. Yet if we mention NWO, we are defined as wacko birds and believe in conspiracy “theories”. Go figure.

Vice President Joe Biden calls for the creation of a “new world order” at the Export Import Bank conference in Washington on April 5, 2013.

 

Senator Daniel Inouye warned of Shadow Government

By now most have heard of the passing of Senator Inouye. All the big names came forward to pay homage to the oldest serving Senator. He of all people understood what happens when the government goes astray. A witness to the internment of thousands of Japanese-Americans during WW II. He warned us at a 1987 hearing. Unfortunately, he lost his way in his warning.  Later, in several videos I watched when others at later hearings starting giving the same warnings and tried to inform, he warned them to be quiet that “it was classified material”. Just for the record:

Recall Senator Daniel K. Inouye in 1987 Chaired the Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition, which held public hearings on the Iran-Contra affair.

Senator Inouye, summarizes here the coverup of the US Shadowy Government involvement; by saying:

“There exists a shadowy Government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.”

 

Obama spoke about Inouye during a memorial service at theWashington National Cathedral on Dec. 21, saying the Hawaii senator had been one of his “earliest political inspirations.”The president said the late senator had served the country with“fundamental integrity.”

Speaking at the service in Hawaii, Locklear said Inouye“was in every way a giant. We have lost an irreplaceable American.”

%d bloggers like this: