Little-Acorn
Gold Member
Irrelevant, of course. The Framers picked the laws they liked (some from other countries), put them IN THE CONSTITUTION, deliberately left others out, and ratified THE CONSTITUTION.And where exactly do you think we got the ideas for the Constitution, out of thin air? Oh right, many from other nations.Just as it is an ABSURD notion for ANY of the Justices to consider LAWS outside of the United States...for which I believe in my mind that ANY Justice that refers to LAWS of other Countries for the sake of precident, political, societial, et,al should be summarily IMPEACHED for the mere thought, and Bar Be Qued IF they use such reasoning outside the Constitution.Two points:
1.) There's no way anyone can know what any judge will do, especially one like Roberts who has crafted bizarre "opinions" in the past.
2.) That said, I tend to unfortunately agree with the opinion posted above. Roberts stated frankly that the reason he decided in favor of the Obamacare mandate, even while declaring it unconstitutional as written in the same breath, is because he felt it was the Court's job to favor Congress's decisions whenever possible.
He could not be more wrong, of course. The Court's job is not to favor Congress. The court's job, instead, is to favor the Constitution. Specifically, the Court's job is to OPPOSE Congress in matters where Congress passes legislation that opposes the Constitution... as Roberts pointed out that the Obamacare mandate clearly did.
If Roberts continues the weird notion that his job is to favor Congress instead of the Constitution, then yes, it's very possible he may rule against Hobby Lobby and the 1st amendment rights of the people running it, since that's what Congress did.
Legislators today who try to go by laws from other countries which are NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION, are violating the Constitution AND the intentions of the people who wrote and ratified it.
While I'm not surprised to see little housepainter advocating that course, I'm surprised that he states his opposition for the written Constitution so flippantly and obviously, in a forum like this where it's so easy to point out his silliness and slap him down.