02.23.2012 in Featured, Politics by NetRight Daily 14

Justice Ginsburg substitutes Constitution for foreign buffet

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Photo Credit: DonkeyHotey/Flickr

By Mark  Wohlschlegel –

“I, ________________, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” 

Above is the oath that any member takes before taking federal office.  Compare this with the statements made below:

“I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.”

How do you reconcile this statement with the oath?  What would you think if I told you that both were made by the same person?  What if I told you this person was a member of our federal government?  Finally, what would you say if I told you that this person is a current sitting Supreme Court Judge, one charged with supporting and defending our Constitution?

That’s right.  Madam Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who took the oath of office on August 10, 1993, recently met with Al Hayat TV in Egypt and made plain her utter disdain for the U.S. Constitution when discussing the forming of Egypt’s new constitution. To put this in context, let’s see how she expounded upon her statement:

 “Now I can’t speak about what the Egyption experience should be because I am operating under a rather old constitution.  The United States in comparison to Egypt is a very new nation and yet we have the oldest written constitution still enforced in the world.”

“I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.”

 “I might look at the constitution of South Africa.  That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, [and] had an independent judiciary.  It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done much more recently than the U.S. Constitution… So yes, why not take advantage of what there is elsewhere in the world?”           

This stinging criticism should not come as a surprise when one looks at the South Africa Constitution in comparison to Madam Justice Ginsburg’s action as a Supreme Court judge.   Madam Justice Ginsburg has played a leading part in having the U.S. Supreme Court look beyond America’s boarders for guidance in her decision.

In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court it struck down a prohibition on gay sex, reasoning such was “an integral part of human freedom in many other countries.” Also in 2003, Ginsburg highlighted an international treaty that supported race-conscious programs to uphold an affirmative action policy at the University of Michigan.

Instead of running around the world looking through the foreign buffet of decisions to back her rationale, Madam Justice Ginsburg should have followed the example of her fellow Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who used U.S. law exclusively to form her decisions.  Instead Madam Justice Ginsburg has chosen to subrogate the supreme law of the land for foreign law.  Furthermore, her claim that our constitution is “old” and outdated is also an open admission that this document was not meant to be treated as a “living” constitution.  Had Madam Justice Ginsburg been working under the South African Constitution, which holds that one “must consider international law,” she needn’t look further for justification than its thorough Bill or Rights.

To defend the right of gay couples, she need only cite the Right of Equity (Ch. 2:9), which restricts the government and private parties from unfairly discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation and belief; and also the right of Freedom and Security of the Person (Ch. 2:12), which guarantees that “Everyone has the right to bodily and psychological integrity, which includes the right (a) to make decisions concerning reproduction [and] to security in and control over their body.”

To defend an affirmative action policy at a school, she could also cite the Right of Equality (2:9) restricting unfair discrimination based on race; and the Right to an Education (2:29), guaranteeing a “basic education”, and “further education, which the state… must make progressively available and accessible.”

The United States Constitution, instead of compiling a long list of “rights”, chose to leave any unmentioned to be “retained by the people.”    Any powers not delegated to the federal government are “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In a day when Presidents and Supreme Court Justices are ignoring the Constitution and the very oath they took to defend it, I believe we are on the verge of losing our identity as Americans.  When our government officials turn to foreign law for their guidance, we the people of the United States, who place these individuals into office to protect us and our laws, will be subrogated to the whim of foreign jurists, who may not even share our same democratic form of government.  By advocating her preference for foreign law over ours, Madam Justice Ginsburg has violated her oath and betrayed her country.  She may as well take the U.S. Constitution and burn it on the steps of the Supreme Court.  In short, she has shown the U.S. Constitution does not matter.

As a caveat, we could learn something from South Africa’s Constitution, which holds that, “A Constitutional Court judge holds office for a non-renewable term of 12 years, or until he or she attains the age of 70, whichever occurs first.”  (8:176)  What would the 78 year old Madam Justice Ginsburg say to that?

Mark Wohlschlegel is a legal analyst with Americans for Limited Government.

This article has 14 comments
  • Sreynolds 23.02.2012 1:53 PM

    Not suprising, liberals don’t like America, in fact, it should be against the law to be liberal.Their goal is to change America into a c ommie state.

  • Grey Bear 23.02.2012 3:05 PM

    We had laws against Communism in the past, today they took over the unions, Hollywood-again & the sick social-justice, common-good morons, they in turn put one in the oval office !

  • marineh2ominer 23.02.2012 3:41 PM

    She should be indicted for perjury when she took this oath fully aware that she disagreed with the United States constituttion .  There are also a couple of other socialists on the supreme court that should be indicted on similar charges and removed . There should be ONE litmus test for a supreme court justice , or any justice for that matter .  Total agreement with the words , wording , and INTENT of the Constitution of this constitutional republic .  

  • BobM001 23.02.2012 4:50 PM

    IMPEACHMENT is to good for this friggin hag. She likes it so much in South Africa? Let the bitch stay there.

  • Michael Tindall 23.02.2012 5:02 PM

    Other governments might have had older Constitutions…if ONLY their forms of government had stood the test of time, like ours has!  The age of our Constitution attests to its STRENGTH, and is not a sign of its obsolescence.  The fact that those who wish to destroy it have had to go to SUCH great lengths to circumvent its protections ALSO go to show its strength…as well as the level of WILLFUL, PURPOSEFUL malfeasance that those who seek its destruction are willing to go to strip us of our rights.

  • dean 23.02.2012 5:43 PM

    Juistice Ginsburg has either becoming senile or is showing her real colors in her old age.  She needs to retire.  The problem Obama would again try to put a left wing liberal on the court.

  • Swann75 23.02.2012 5:52 PM

    The comments by Justice Ginsburg lends credence to my belief that Supreme Court Justices should not set on the court for life.  Maybe this woman is or was intelligent at one time in the past, but she is now, I believe, suffering from dementia.  I think that the Justices should be revetted every ten years and retired at 80 years old.

  • Kendm1 23.02.2012 6:02 PM

    Its time to stop complaining and start getting involved.. too many people talk and sit on their hands as Americans. It is the fault of Americans, Christians specifically, who do not take seriously the freedoms we have been afforded by the very blood of our families. Gos says “if His people would turn from their evil ways and seek Him” He would heal their land and prosper them. When God said “be in the world but not of the world” He is saying we are to be a mirror of His Son and our Saviour, Jesus The Christ, The only Hope of the world. We don’t have to understand, we just have to turn from our evil ways and do righteousness. Stop living for the all mighty dollar and ruining our country and do Gods’ will. Someone with money and know how needs to organize Conservative Americans and fight against the evils that control our government, prayer and involvement and education to the issues is a must!

  • rowley 23.02.2012 6:41 PM

    She should step down.

  • wportier 24.02.2012 7:03 AM

    This women need to get off the bench. She losing it. There should be some want to get these judges off the bench when they get out of line. There need to be a way to handle problems of this nature. She took an oath to up hold our laws not other countries. If she rather laws from other place . She need to go there and enforce there laws…..Let add she to Col West list in his statement.

  • Rita 24.02.2012 10:29 AM

    She should be put off the bench, and our current President should be impeached.  Neither are defending the Constitution.  They are making excuses and apologizing for it!  They are not fit to hold their positions!!

  • Greg137 24.02.2012 12:41 PM

    So by foreign law, Justice Ginsburg shouldn’t even be in office! She is a typical liberal idiot… The only problem is she is protected by an “old” document that she doesn’t beleive in… T.T   She should be disbared and impeached… Her age should be all the more reason as to why we need to get Obama out of office! She is 78 and so 8 years from now she would be 86? She could be dead before then…   We need a true conservative in office(in case she should retire)!  Ron paul IS a sellout I know because his son(Rand Paul) was offered the vice-presidency by RINO flip-flopper ROMNEY… In short, the Ron Paul people are being played by Romney! Trump’s decision to run if Romney is not ticket smells like the  bastard Romney is trying to buy the election! All three men should be disgraced for being socialist sellouts to honor their master Obama(the only Republican that Obama can beat is Romney)! The liberal political class looks after their own(because they are liberals first)!  Santorum for president 2012!

Back to top

Copyright © 2008-2014 NetRight Daily