Way back in March, I noted that Reps. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) and Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) were pushing some wacky new scheme called the “Reaffirmation of American Independence Resolution.” In case the name didn’t give it away, it’s the latest in a long line of right-wing attacks on the federal judiciary.
This one addresses the conservative concern that the Supreme Court has, on occasion, cited international law and/or legal traditions in high court rulings, which the right apparently considers scandalous.
To remedy this “crisis,” Feeney and Goodlatte created a congressional resolution that would express the sense of Congress that judicial decisions should never cite foreign laws, even in passing. Feeney, in particular, feels so strongly about this, he suggested he’d consider impeachment for high court justices who made note of international legal developments in their rulings. He even suggests on his website that the U.S. may someday be governmed by the laws of “Jamaica, India, Zimbabwe, or the European Union.” (How he arrived at these speific examples, we’ll never know.)
And while it was fun to mock Feeney’s lunacy back in March, I’m afraid this resolution has actually picked up some support from the far-right wing of the House Republican Caucus (though that’s a little redundant, isn’t it?). At this point, H. Res. 568 has 74 co-sponsors, prompting the LA Times to editorialize on the resolution today and call its supporters “boneheads of history.”
Feeney’s HR 568 would direct federal judges not to cite or rely on “judgments, laws or pronouncements” of any other nation in reaching their decisions. This silly declaration, now before the House Judiciary Committee, would have no force of law even if it passed, and it surely would violate the Constitution’s separation of powers. Federal judges will dismiss the measure for what it is: more sputtering from the right wing over Supreme Court decisions supporting gay rights and affirmative action that note the legal tolerance other nations display on these issues.
Mostly what HR 568 does is unmask Feeney as a bonehead when it comes to history. “Americans should not have to look for guidance on how to live their lives from … foreign organizations,” his overblown resolution thunders.
Well then, we’d best forget about the fundamental rights of man. That linchpin of our democracy is a Swiss import from Enlightenment-era philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose writings influenced the Constitution’s framers.
Indeed, humanity’s fundamental rights would just be the first thing to go.
Out goes the idea of balancing power among different branches of government. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and the other drafters may have caught wind of that clever idea from the writings of 18th century Baron de Montesquieu — mon Dieu, a Frenchman.
A government with a healthy respect for private property? Trace that one back to the 17th century English philosopher John Locke, whose treatises were on colonists’ bookshelves.
Trial by a jury of peers? Another dangerous British import, from the Middle Ages.
Just as Americans are a mix of every ethnicity and race, so too are our state and federal laws. America’s early leaders stitched together these patchworks by borrowing from French, English and Spanish precedents, some that go all the way back to the ancient Athenian city-state, where citizens had the right to vote. Rep. Feeney, that’s Athens as in Greece, not Georgia.
Post Script: One quick side note about the LAT editorial. Unfortunately, the paper got the bill number wrong, which might matter if the public wanted to contact representatives about this inane resolution. It’s not H.R. 568, as the Times said, it’s H. Res. 568. This may seem trivial, but H.R. 568 is an entirely different piece of legislation, which deals with water pollution, not the federal judiciary. If you wanted to follow the progress or complain to your member of Congress, it’s something to keep in mind.