Supreme Court Justice Breyer: Laws in other countries equal to Constitution

Constitution and gavel

Over the past forty to fifty years, the Supreme Court has established a long track record of making decisions based on political considerations and political-correctness instead of relying on what the Constitution says they should do. And as we see in this story, a certain member of the high court actually endorses the practice.

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer has a new book, The Court and the World, in which he shares his observations about law and the court. In it, as the latest issue of Time reveals, he concludes that there’s clearly nothing wrong with American courts—including SCOTUS—considering the laws and judicial rulings of other nations.

For example, should the Supreme Court care that other countries have abolished the death penalty?

“If someone with a job roughly like my own, facing a legal problem roughly like the one confronting me, interpreting a document that resembles the one I look to, has written a legal opinion about a similar matter, why not read what that judge has said? I might learn from it, whether or not I end up agreeing with it.”

Wait a minute. Why not read what the other judge has said?

Hey, Stevie Wonder! How about the fact that the other judge isn’t working off of the U.S. Constitution? You remember the Constitution, don’t you? It’s that pesky little document you swore to support and defend when you took your oath of office. And even if there are judges in other countries who have “a job like yours” or face “a legal problem roughly like the one” you face, they aren’t operating under a constitution like ours.

One more thing: even if the issue they face is precisely the same, you are a servant of the people of the United States. So in the end, it matters not what other countries do with the death penalty; it has nothing to do with what Americans decide to do.

How do we address their lawlessness? IMPEACHMENT!!

In fact, back in 2004 there were several members of Congress who proposed impeaching justices who do as Breyer is suggesting. Tom Feeney (R-FL) even used the “I” word in an interview with at the time:

“This resolution advises the courts that it is improper for them to substitute foreign law for American law or the American Constitution. To the extent they deliberately ignore Congress’ admonishment, they are no longer engaging in ‘good behavior’ in the meaning of the Constitution and they may subject themselves to the ultimate remedy, which would be impeachment. “

Do you know who the justices were being discussed for citing foreign law in their rulings in 2004? John Paul Stevens, Stephen Breyer, and Anthony Kennedy. You remember Kennedy, don’t you? He wrote the majority opinion on the same-sex marriage case. Makes you wonder, eh?

All three branches of the federal government have proven their disregard or ignorance of their constitutional responsibilities. We need to be vigilant in using every tool at our disposal to get rid of these liberty-killing men and women before it’s too late.


Don't Feed The RINOsDavid Leach is the owner and publisher of The Strident Conservative where he is proudly politically-incorrect and always “right.” He is also a frequent contributor at

His political commentaries can be heard daily on KLZ560 AM and other Crawford Broadcasting stations.

Contact him at