A British barrister who specializes in religious liberty cases says it's foolish for American courts to incorporate European jurisprudence into U.S. case law.
Several liberal justices on the U.S. Supreme Court have suggested in their opinions on homosexual rights, affirmative action, and capital punishment that U.S. case law should correspond with European legal standards. But British barrister Paul Diamond says he is surprised by the wide extent of American incorporation of European jurisprudence on all court levels. It would be foolish, says Diamond, for America to "throw away its exceptionalism for a few trinkets of an international tribunal." He argues that many people do not know how "truly appalling" the European Court of Human Rights is. "Why would you want to go to a European court's jurisprudence based in Strasburg? Forty-six judges -- there's a Russian judge, an Albanian judge, an Azerbaijani judge, a Romanian judge; I could go on," he comments. "Do you think the Moldovan judges, perhaps, ... are they even independent with people like President Putin around? Do you think he would let a Russian judge do what he thought was independently right according to the law?" Diamond says that these courts are "extremely poor quality," and if Americans want to sacrifice what the founding fathers established with their blood for those judicial opinions, then it would be -- in his words -- "too stupid."
If you believe OneNewsNow.com is an important source for Christian news, please consider a small tax-deductible gift for this service.
