Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Supreme Court Nominee Favors Use of International Law

This article was on the Homeschool Legal Defense Association's Website and I wanted to pass it on. It shares with us how Elena Kagan could be a threat to our parental rights because she favors using international law when deciding cases that come before the bench. This is not a new trend, but it is a dangerous one. Our country should be ruled by it's own citizens and it's own laws. Because of this concern the HSLDA is recommending we call our Senators to try and stop this nomination. For more review of Elena's history with her preference for International law read their other article “Will Elena Kagan use International Law as Supreme Court Justice?”.

Elena Kagan Confirms Her Support for International Law

William A. Estrada, Esq.
Director of Federal Relations

Melanie Palazzo
Congressional Action Program Director

July 12, 2010

HSLDA urges our members and homeschoolers nationwide to call their two U.S. senators and express their opinions on the nomination of Elena Kagan for Supreme Court.

Elana Kagan was recently nominated by President Obama to replace Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. Ms. Kagan underwent a four-day confirmation hearing held by the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee ending July 1.

HSLDA has been concerned about Ms. Kagan’s nomination because of her support of international law over the U.S. Constitution while she was Dean of Harvard School of Law. Our concerns were not alleviated, but only grew with Kagan’s answers during her hearing.

For instance, Senator Chuck Grassley (IA) asked Ms. Kagan on the second day of the hearings, “Should judges look to foreign law for ‘good ideas.’ ”

Ms. Kagan responded, “I am in favor of good ideas wherever we can get them.”

Senator Grassley later asked, “If you were confirmed, would you rely on or cite international foreign law when deciding cases?”

Ms. Kagan’s response: “It depends. There are some cases in which the citation of foreign law or international law might be appropriate.” (Watch the hearings in their entirety online.)

We are concerned about Kagan citing foreign or international law as a Supreme Court justice because of the danger that could ensue if she ever cited the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) as precedent in a Supreme Court opinion. This treaty could severely limit parental rights. To learn more about why Kagan citing the CRC as a Supreme Court Justice would be dangerous please read “Will Elena Kagan use International Law as Supreme Court Justice?”

We encourage you to call your two U.S. senators and share with their staff your thoughts about Ms. Kagan’s confirmation. We expect that the full Senate will vote on Ms. Kagan's nomination in the next couple of weeks.

You can reach your two U.S. Senators by calling the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121, or toll-free at 866-220-0044. You can find your U.S. senators by using HSLDA’s Legislative Toolbox.


  1. Bosh! As usual from you folks. Elena Kagan supports the Constitution. She, unlike you, does not have her head in the sand regarding how other countries treat their children.

  2. Elena Kagan does not support the constitution in it's original intent, but rather she believes it is a living document to be interpreted “through ever-changing circumstances.” "Either way," Kagan said, "we apply what they say, what they meant to do, so in that sense we are all originalists."

    She also feels that international law does have an important role in deciding cases. In fact when she was dean of Harvard Law School she felt that international law was more important than US Constitutional law. While she was dean she made studying international law a requirement and changed US Constitutional law to merely an elective. A memo written by her and some other professors about the changes stated that “students should learn to locate what they are learning about public and private law in the United States within the context of a larger universe....which represents a door into the global sphere that students will use as context for U.S. law.” She wants students to use the global sphere as a context for US law, and I believe she will do so as a US Supreme Court justice too.

    People who support Parental Rights and US Sovereignty certainly do not have their head in the sand about how other countries treat their children. We know all to well that many countries are guilty of such atrocities as child slave trade, child labor, child prostitution and arming their children for war. In the Unites States of America all those things are illegal here. We have led the way in showing how children should be treated and respected. However we did not do it because of international pressure or because some international document said we should. We did so because “we the people” said it was the right thing to do. What we do not need to do is a sign a document that becomes equal to our constitution which allows an international body to regulate more than those types of atrocities but also undermines the most sacred relationship of all societies, the relationship between a parent and child. The UNCRC goes much further than protecting children from wrongs, it begins to try to protect them from teaching children points of views different from those that the liberal international board feel are acceptable. I fear that those who do not understand this are the ones burying their heads in the sand.