We found out in class yesterday that one of our professors was cited in a Supreme Court Decision! How fab! All right, it was the Supreme Court of the Philippines, but, still, he can go the rest of his life discussing his Supreme Court citation.
It had something to do with Maritime law, or something. He didn't really go into detail.
I just hope the citizens of the Philippines don't throw a fit for their Court's citation of an international opinion.
8 comments:
Why would they get mad? They should be honored for having the privilege of quoting an American. We can’t cite foreigners because they’re not Americans, and thus inferior.
You can trust me on this, I live in DeLay’s district.
Steve how interesting. I wonder if the Phillipines judicial system is like Indonesia's??
So Sam, as an Australian i am classed as Inferior in the States as far as being cited?
Somehow i think inferior is a very poor choice of words.
We cite the British a lot, so any commonwealth country should be ok. I've at least seen a few Canadian and Australian citations in the past.
It's so convenient to say "we're America, so we don't need to listen to what others say." unfortunately, we've stepped neck deep into a world economy, and with the international situation as it is, we can't ignore what those we'd call our allies might think. People decry Justice Kennedy because he dared to mention what Western Europe does, as though that would open the floodgates to relying on what Pol Pot might have decided on how to deal with government protestors. However, many of these same people criticize our allies for not "taking our side" on international affairs. That just doesn't make much sense to me.
It's not like Kennedy "relied" on what Western Europe does, either. He used their actions much like dicta. However, what he's done was so heinous that they had to push an act to try to corral this runaway judiciary. I love Congress.
Volokh gave a good counter example to show why citing the EU can be troubling. Kennedy referenced the EU to show the trend in Western Civilization. Had the Bowers court justitified their views on Western Civilization by citing Leviticus in dicta, I think that would offend the left. Citing the Bible in dicta is just as much establishing religion as citing the EU in dicta is adopting the European Constitution. Though citing the EU didn’t change the outcome, it is still offensive to some that the Constitution of the US is being interpreted in light of how another country interprets an entirely different document.
I can see that. At least it's a fresh argument as opposed to the "It's the U.S. Constitution, dammit!"
I recognize that the typical person who reads an opinion wouldn't recognize the lack of actual authority dicta has, and I can see how the mere mention of how Europe might think or what the Bible, or the Koran, or the Tao of Pooh might say could cause people concern.
I wonder how it correlates to Texas citing Michigan in dicta. I know, that's an odd combination, because anyone who cites Michigan is taking a step up, but I figured you have to pick some state...
Post a Comment