Can someone give me a few places to start to research the relationship
between the US Supreme Court and International Law? I'm thinking of
looking into whether there's any discernible pattern between periods
of greater or lesser patriotism/nationalism/isolationism, or between
different presidents, and the type of decision regarding international
law rendered by the Supreme Court. Can you help point me to where I
can start my research (maybe some similar research that has been done
already), or a good way to look through SC decisions (categorized by
"topic", if such an index exists). Basically, I just need some help
kick-starting my research in a field in which I have no real prior
knowledge. Thaks!

---

Request for Question Clarification by weisstho-ga on 27 Feb 2006 17:58 PST

What do you mean by "International Law"?  Do you mean the laws of
other nations used to interpret Treaties that the United States is a
signatory to?

---

Clarification of Question by richardmtl-ga on 27 Feb 2006 19:11 PST

Hi there,

Well, your request for clarification wasn't completely clear to me :)
but I do understand what you're getting at. In a sense, yes, I'm
interested in how the Supreme Court has interpreted and applied
treaties that the US is a signatory to, but I am also interested in
cases (if they exist) where SC decisions have been taken which, while
not necessarily regarding a treaty that the US has signed, still refer
to existing treaty regimes. One example of a case that I would
consider in this vein is the Pauquete Habana case
(http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=175&invol=677)

Let me know if you need more guidance.

---

Request for Question Clarification by weisstho-ga on 28 Feb 2006 14:55 PST

Thanks for the information. I will have to pass - any other GAR is welcome to it. 

Interesting:  I am an attorney that enjoys USSC analysis and this
issue is always interesting. Anyway, C-Span just carried a speech by
Justice Scalia on this very topic. Of course Justice Scalia doesn't
believe in using any case law from other nations unless absolutely
required in order to interpret a treaty or necessary in choice of law
case.

I really liked Chief Justice Roberts comment on the topic during his
confirmation hearing:  "Senator, the use of case law from other
countries is a bit like looking for friends in a large room where
you're giving a speech.  You can always find someone (or some case law
that) you like."

Good Luck,

---

Clarification of Question by richardmtl-ga on 28 Feb 2006 15:16 PST

Thanks for the quote, I may even use it!

---

Request for Question Clarification by pafalafa-ga on 16 Mar 2006 11:33 PST

Richard,

Take at look at these search results from cases and documents from the
Supreme Court:


://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-04,GGLD:en&q=site:www%2Esupremecourtus%2Egov+obligations+AND+%28international+OR+treaty+OR+treaties%29


In one way or another, these all bear on international law.  Is this
sort of thing useful?

pafalafa-ga

---

Clarification of Question by richardmtl-ga on 17 Mar 2006 05:48 PST

Thanks pafalafa,

Well, those cases might end up being useful too, thanks (I hadn't
thought of using the word "obligation" in my searches, that was nice).
To be honest though, the Yale article that myoarin posted was right on
the money in terms of what I was thinking. But you can go ahead and
post your answer if you want.

It'd be great if you could find me another article or two along the
lines of the Yale one, or maybe a book or two, but I won't push it. :)

Thanks!

This may not be exactly what you are asking about.

My German newspaper today has an article that mentions that the
Supreme Court was influenced by laws and court decisions in other
countries in three recent cases:

Declaring the Texas sodomy law to be unconstitutional;
Eliminating the death sentence for the mentally handicapped;
ditto for minors.

According to the article, Antonin Scalia has said the the Supreme
Court in the future will also consider foreign and international law
in its interpretation of human rights, and "with increasing frequency"
 ("in immer kürzeren Zeitabständen").  This said at a conference of
the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
However, this does not seem to have been meant as a positive trend. 
Conservative lawyer Eric Hargan and the retired judge Robert Bork
"went a step further" and warned against an "erosion" of American
soverainty if the SC cites foreign and international law in its
interpretations of American human rights.

Perhaps some can find a site with information about this conference (I couldn't).

I hope this is a help.

Yes! This is exactly the type of material I'm looking for! Thanks!

Great!  Thank the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung for being right on top of news.  

Of course, Weisstho was listening to the talk that was the basis for
the article. Here are some links to it and discussions.  You can find
many, many more references searching with:  Scalia international
foreign law

First, here is, indeed, a paper on the subject, found in the 2nd site:
http://www.yale.edu/yjil/PDF/Cleveland.pdf
http://lawofnations.blogspot.com/2006/02/justice-scalia-on-foreign-law-and.html
http://lawofnations.blogspot.com/2006/02/justice-scalia-on-role-of-foreign.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1352357/posts
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20050119.html
    
      This is from Nov. 2005
http://tdaxp.blogspirit.com/archive/2005/11/25/antonin-scalia-bitchslaps-international-law.html

     The following is from Oct. 2003 from Justice O?Connell
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35367

Glad to be able to help.  I hope the paper gives you more examples.
Regards, Myoarin

Great article, Myoarin, it is exactly the kind of prior research I was
looking for. I think that that single article will be the biggest help
I have found so far. Thanks!

I posted a Clarification request, above, in case you hadn't seen it.

pafalafa-ga

I was just being lucky.  Check out Paf's new string  - 31 sites in one blow!!

Wow!