FOREIGN LAW AND THE S.C.

Read the article, "Justice O'Connor Puts Foreign Law Center Stage," from Law.com:

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor received three standing ovations and a mounted glass globe this week when she gave a speech at a black-tie dinner for the Atlanta-based Southern Center for International Studies.

At the U.S. Supreme Court, however, O'Connor's message -- that American courts should pay more attention to the laws of other countries -- gets a much more mixed reception.

The rest of the article discusses some recent cases in which Rehnquist and Scalia attack the notion that foreign laws should matter for the members of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Seems to me that the laws, customs, and rulings of other countries are an appropriate a source for constitutional argument. Or, framed more negatively, parochial nationalism is hardly a good constitutional principle, and it's not one that is well founded in the constitutional text. Supreme courts in other countries (India, Australia, for example) often look to U.S. precedent for a variety of reasons. I'm not persuaded of the value of American exceptionalism in this regard. That's not a full argument, but the weather's nice here (close to 70 degrees, sunny) so I'm going to teach and then get outside. . .