WorldNetDaily          
     
   
           
MONDAY
JULY 7
2003
 
 
           




  ShopNetDaily
  Page 1 News
  Page 2 News
  G2 Bulletin
  BizNetDaily
  LocalNetDaily
  Commentary
  Classified Ads
  Letters
  People Search
  SportsNetDaily
  Health
  Weather
  TV Guide
  Movies
  Stocks



   
WND
LAW OF THE LAND
Justice: Can Constitution
make it in global age?

On TV, Breyer wonders whether it will 'fit into governing documents of other nations'

Posted: July 7, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern


 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

In a rare appearance on a television news show, Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer questioned whether the U.S. Constitution, the oldest governing document in use in the world today, will continue to be relevant in an age of globalism.

Speaking with ABC News' "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos and his colleague Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Breyer took issue with Justice Antonin Scalia, who, in a dissent in last month's Texas sodomy ruling, contended the views of foreign jurists are irrelevant under the U.S. Constitution.

Breyer had held that a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that homosexuals had a fundamental right to privacy in their sexual behavior showed that the Supreme Court's earlier decision to the contrary was unfounded in the Western tradition.

"We see all the time, Justice O'Connor and I, and the others, how the world really it's trite but it's true is growing together," Breyer said. "Through commerce, through globalization, through the spread of democratic institutions, through immigration to America, it's becoming more and more one world of many different kinds of people. And how they're going to live together across the world will be the challenge, and whether our Constitution and how it fits into the governing documents of other nations, I think will be a challenge for the next generations."

In the Lawrence v Texas case decided June 26, Justice Anthony Kennedy gave as a reason for overturning a Supreme Court ruling of 17 years earlier upholding sodomy laws that it was devoid of any reliance on the views of a "wider civilization."

Scalia answered in his dissent: "The court's discussion of these foreign views (ignoring, of course, the many countries that have retained criminal prohibitions on sodomy) is ... meaningless dicta. Dangerous dicta, however, since this court ... should not impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans," he said quoting the 2002 Foster v. Florida case.

Scalia's scathing critique of the 6-3 sodomy ruling was unusual in its bluntness.

"Today's opinion is the product of a court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct," he wrote. Later he concluded: "This court has taken sides in the culture war."

Both O'Connor and Breyer sought to downplay antipathy between the justices no matter how contentious matters before the court become. O'Connor said justices don't take harsh criticisms personally.

"When you work in a small group of that size, you have to get along, and so you're not going to let some harsh language, some dissenting opinion, affect a personal relationship," she said. "You can't do that."

Breyer agreed.

"So if I'm really put out by something, I can go to the person who wrote it and say, 'Look, I think you've gone too far here.'"

O'Connor, too, seemed to suggest in the ABC interview that the Constitution was far from the final word in governing America. Asked if there might come a day when it would no longer be the last word on the law, she said: "Well, you always have the power of entering into treaties with other nations which also become part of the law of the land, but I can't see the day when we won't have a constitution in our nation."

Asked to explain what he meant when he said judges who favor a very strict literal interpretation of the Constitution can't justify their practices by claiming that's what the framers wanted, Breyer responded: "I meant that the extent to which the Constitution is flexible is a function of what provisions you're talking about. When you look at the word 'two' for two representatives from every state in the United States Senate, two means two. But when you look like a word look at a word like 'interstate commerce,' which they didn't have automobiles in mind, or they didn't have airplanes in mind, or telephones, or the Internet, or you look at a word like 'liberty,' and they didn't have in mind at that time the problems of privacy brought about, for example, by the Internet and computers. You realize that the framers intended those words to maintain constant values, but values that would change in their application as society changed."

In an unrelated matter, O'Connor indicated on "This Week" that she would likely serve out the next term on the court, dismssing speculation that she was about to retire.

The current court is split between Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Clarence Thomas and Scalia, who tend to hold the traditional constitutionalist approach to rulings, and the majority of O'Connor, Breyer, Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginzburg, David H. Souter and John Paul Stevens, who tend to believe in the concept of a "living Constitution" subject to changes in public opinion and interpretation.


Editor's note: The upcoming August issue of WND's acclaimed Whistleblower magazine will be on America's out-of-control judicial system, focusing in particular on the United States Supreme Court, whose recent rulings have validated reverse discrimination, opened the door for legalized polygamy, incest and bestiality, and freed hundreds of sex abusers. The current issue (July), titled "THE CONSTITUTION: America's ultimate battleground," explores whether the Constitution is still America's "supreme law of the land."

SPECIAL OFFER:Through 2 p.m. Pacific (5 p.m. Eastern) TODAY ONLY (Monday, July 7), readers who subscribe, renew or give a gift subscription to Whistleblower will receive these three highly acclaimed special editions FREE:

"THE FED: How your money and life are controlled by America's banking system;"

"TAX REVOLT: How Americans are challenging the IRS and the 16th Amendment;" and

"THE NEW WORLD RE-ORDER: Exposing the United Nations' attack on U.S. sovereignty."

  • SUBSCRIBE to Whistleblower before Monday, July 7 at 2 p.m. Pacific (5 p.m. Eastern) and receive FREE the blockbuster special Whistleblower issues on "THE FED," "TAX REVOLT," and "THE NEW WORLD RE-ORDER." Offer good while supplies last.

  • RENEW your Whistleblower subscription before Monday, July 7 at 2 p.m. Pacific (5 p.m. Eastern) and receive FREE the blockbuster special Whistleblower issues on "THE FED," "TAX REVOLT," and "THE NEW WORLD RE-ORDER." Offer good while supplies last.

  • GIVE A GIFT Whistleblower subscription before Monday, July 7 at 2 p.m. Pacific (5 p.m. Eastern) and receive FREE the blockbuster special Whistleblower issues on "THE FED," "TAX REVOLT," and "THE NEW WORLD RE-ORDER." Offer good while supplies last.





   E-mail to a Friend        Printer-friendly version
 
NEWS:

Justice: Can Constitution make it in global age?
 
Bush not safe on Africa trip?
 
Ann Coulter on new WND radio show today!
 
Mystery crop circles found in California
 
COMMENTARY:

Impeach the 'Sodomy 6'
By Joseph Farah
 
Citizens too busy to see looming danger
By Barbara Simpson
 
Land of the fearful, home of the craven
By Vox Day
 
 
   




GO TO PAGE 1 | GO TO PAGE 2 | GO TO COMMENTARY

SEARCH WND | CONTACT WND
 
     
WorldNetDaily.com

2003 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc.
Contact WND
Co-Located at Fiber Internet Center