UN treaty cited in SC decision

[Daddyo]

imported post

For those who don't think International treaties will affect our laws...

http://www.hslda.org/docs/media/2010/201005180.asp

Apparently the UN Rights of the Child treaty was cited in the majority opinion in the recent Supreme Court case regarding life sentences for juveniles. Whether you agree with the decision or not, this sets a dangerous precedent.

 

[eye95]

imported post

Daddyo wrote:

For those who don't think International treaties will affect our laws...

http://www.hslda.org/docs/media/2010/201005180.asp

Apparently the UN Rights of the Child treaty was cited in the majority opinion in the recent Supreme Court case regarding life sentences for juveniles. Whether you agree with the decision or not, this sets a dangerous precedent.

Is that a treaty that the president has signed and the Senate has ratified? If it is, then it is part of the law of the land per the Constitution and is an apt citation for the SCOTUS.

 

[Master Doug Huffman]

imported post

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-7412.pdf

Paragraph III D, page 30

We also note, as petitioner and his amici em-phasize, that Article 37(a) of the United Nations Conven-tion on the Rights of the Child, Nov. 20, 1989, 1577 U. N. T. S. 3 (entered into force Sept. 2, 1990), ratified by every nation except the United States and Somalia,

Read, think more. Write, prate less.

 

[cloudcroft]

imported post

Is this OT?

What does it have to do with OC?

I mean, if that other thread that DID have more to do with OC than this one was locked for NOT being OT, why isn't this one also locked?

Apply the OT rule for everyone, yes?

Where is M and G -- 2 OT police -- when you need them?

-- John D.