Alabama voters just passed a constitutional amendment that would overrule the Supreme Court

[theHandpuppet]

SLATE
Even Crazier in Alabama
Voters just passed a constitutional amendment that would overrule the Supreme Court.
By Mark Joseph Stern

Few states pass more unconstitutional laws than Alabama. No matter what the subject—from free speech, school prayer, and teaching evolution, to gay rights, abortion, and cruel and unusual punishment—Alabama’s stunningly reactionary laws have been repeatedly smacked down by the federal courts. On Tuesday, however, Alabamans passed a constitutional amendment that aims to neatly remedy its legal losing streak—by overruling the Supreme Court.

On its face, the amendment appears to be just another absurd and xenophobic effort to outlaw Sharia law; it bars courts within the state from considering international legal principles. But in fact, the amendment goes much further than that. When Oklahoma tried to explicitly ban Sharia law in 2010, a federal judge struck down the measure as unconstitutional religious discrimination because it intentionally targeted Muslims. So Alabama’s amendment excluded any mention of Sharia altogether, choosing instead to “prohibit courts and other legal authorities from applying foreign law if doing so would violate rights guaranteed to citizens of Alabama.”

This sentence might seem toothlessly vague, but it’s a legal hand grenade—one that Alabama now seems poised to lob at the Supreme Court. The motivation behind the new amendment actually traces further back than conservatives’ current Sharia freakout, to about a decade ago. In March 2005, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Roper v. Simmons, holding that the execution of juveniles was unconstitutional. Technically, the court—in an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy—rested its holding on the Eighth Amendment, asserting that the execution of minors constituted “cruel and unusual punishment.”

But in a remarkable section at the end of the opinion, Kennedy observed that “the Court has [often] referred to the laws of other countries and to international authorities as instructive for its interpretation” of the Eighth Amendment, citing five previous death penalty cases in which the justices had cited the laws of “civilized nations” to guide their own opinions. Then Kennedy embarked on a CliffsNotes tour of international death penalty law, pointing out the “stark reality” that America remained the only country in the world to officially approve of executing minors. “This reality does not become controlling” of the Supreme Court’s decision, he warned, but “the opinion of the world community … does provide respected and significant confirmation for our own conclusions.”....

MORE at http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/jurisprudence/2014/11/alabama_foreign_law_amendment_challenges_supreme_court_on_gay_rights_death.html

[Feral Child]

1. K&R n/t

[geek tragedy]

2. obviously those voters were demanding the Democrats move left and be more progressive

/DUconventionalwisdom

[mountain grammy]

17. Oh yeah, for sure..

[malaise]

3. Have they seceded yet???

Send them packing.

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. When you say "them", to whom are you referring?

the law makers or the citizens of Alabama?

[theHandpuppet]

11. Hi dixiegrrrrl

Do you have any links to sources that would provide a demographic breakdown of who voted this time around in Alabama? I have a feeling there are plenty of eligible voters who simply aren't showing up to vote. We have to figure out why they aren't voting and how we can increase voter registration and participation.

[dixiegrrrrl]

13. don't have any info at this time

Hissyspit might, tho.

[theHandpuppet]

4. Another excerpt

...What would that mean in practice? According to the amendment, any decision that uses international law could not legally be applied in Alabama courts, since citing it would involve the “application” of foreign law. A state judge couldn’t overrule the execution of a minor based on Roper, since Roper relied in part on international law. Nor could she annul the conviction of a gay person for having gay sex, since Lawrence cited foreign courts. The execution of the mentally retarded, too, would be back on the table in Alabama; in fact, much of the Supreme Court’s modern death penalty jurisprudence would now seem to be inapplicable in the state. This is not some speculative overinterpretation of a poorly worded amendment; overturning established death penalty law was a stated goal of the amendment’s chief drafter. No doubt a team of lawyers is already poring over Supreme Court rulings, searching each decision for a reference to international law. Once they’ve found one, they can alert state judges: Use this ruling, and you’ll be breaking the law....

...Still, Alabama’s eagerness to try is a disturbing indication of just how disrespectful the state remains toward fundamental rule of law. Alabama discarded its anti-gay sodomy law only this summer, 11 years after Lawrence. In 2012, it so egregiously violated constitutional safeguards for death row inmates that even Justice Samuel Alito put his foot down. The state’s contempt for federal authority is alarming and indefensible, and its capacity for constitutional chicanery seems to know no bounds. For years, Alabama watched as the Supreme Court struck down its outrageous laws. With its latest amendment, the state devised a solution as brazen as it is appalling: If Alabama’s laws can’t survive the Supreme Court, just kick the Supreme Court out of Alabama.

[hobbit709]

5. Since a lot of our law is based on English common law is that "foreign" too?

[jberryhill]

6. Not one word of the Bible written here either

[hobbit709]

9. But that is GAWD'S law and it overrides everything else.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

8. English, French and Spanish common law are part of our laws.

Depending on what part of the country you live in.

Does this include the Spanish law that was used by the Republic of Texas, and is still seen in the equal property rights of married women in Texas? That's been the law in Texas since 1836, the first year of the Republic.



There's also a seminar you can take in law school about laws in other countries, and basically the laws in other countries are not as strictly written and strictly interpreted as they are here.

[onenote]

10. Not really. Doesn't overrule the Supreme Court. Doesn't do much of anything except screw

up some contracts.

The entire text is below. It says Alabama courts can't apply or enforce foreign law where it would violate rights under Alabama or US Constitution (but then carves out certain exceptions). Courts don't generally apply foreign law except in certain contractual cases or, on occasion, where choice of law principles dictate (such as in certain custody/divorce type situations). And they don't apply foreign law where it would violate the Constitution to do so. When the Supreme Court decided the death penalty case it referenced and discussed and even gave consideration to international legal practice. But it did not "apply" or "enforce" foreign law. It applied and enforced the United States Constitution. The Alabama amendment is supremely stupid and may cause some consternation and confusion in contract cases and some domestic dispute cases (adoption, for example). But its hard to see how a challenge to it gets to the Supreme Court since it doesn't appear to be facially unconstitutional. Maybe a case where the amendment is applied will come up that would give rise to a Supreme Court challenge, but I don't see it. But the amendment is just another case of largely pointless stupid from Alabama.

(a) This amendment shall be known and may be cited as the American and Alabama Laws for Alabama Courts Amendment.

(b) The law of Alabama provides:
(1) The State of Alabama has developed its unique public policy of laws based on the United States Constitution, as protected by Amendment 10 to the United States Constitution. (2) Upon becoming a state in 1819, Alabama adopted its first constitutional and statutory enactments, upon which it has built the rights, privileges, obligations, and requirements of its government and citizens. (3) Both the provisions of the Alabama Constitution and the statutes and regulations of the State of Alabama, with interpreting opinions by its courts of competent jurisdiction, have developed the state's public policy. (4) The public policy of the State of Alabama protects the unique rights of its citizens beginning with Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, guaranteeing the equality and rights of men. Except as permitted by due process of law and the right of the people to vote for self-determination, the rights, privileges, and immunities of the citizens of the State of Alabama are inviolate. (5) Different from the law of the State of Alabama is foreign law, which is any law, rule, or legal code, or system established, used, or applied in a jurisdiction outside of the states or territories of the United States, or which exist as a separate body of law, legal code, or system adopted or used anywhere by any people, group, or culture different from the Constitution and laws of the United States or the State of Alabama. (6) Alabama has a favorable business climate and has attracted many international businesses. While Alabama business persons and companies may decide to use foreign law in foreign courts, the public policy of Alabama is to prohibit anyone from requiring Alabama courts to apply and enforce foreign laws. (7) The public policy of this state is to protect its citizens from the application of foreign laws when the application of a foreign law will result in the violation of a right guaranteed by the Alabama Constitution or of the United States Constitution, including, but not limited to, due process, freedom of religion, speech, assembly, or press, or any right of privacy or marriage. (8) Article IV, Section 1, of the United States Constitution provides that full faith and credit shall be given by each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of other states. Provided, however, when any such public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of another state violate the public policy of the State of Alabama, the State of Alabama is not and shall not be required to give full faith and credit thereto.

(c) A court, arbitrator, administrative agency, or other adjudicative, arbitrative, or enforcement authority shall not apply or enforce a foreign law if doing so would violate any state law or a right guaranteed by the Constitution of this state or of the United States.

(d) If any contractual provision or agreement provides for the choice of a foreign law to govern its interpretation or the resolution of any dispute between the parties, and if the enforcement or interpretation of the contractual provision or agreement would result in a violation of a right guaranteed by the Constitution of this state or of the United States, the agreement or contractual provision shall be modified or amended to the extent necessary to preserve the constitutional rights of the parties.

(e) If any contractual provision or agreement provides for the choice of venue or forum outside of the states or territories of the United States, and if the enforcement or interpretation of the contract or agreement applying that choice of venue or forum provision would result in a violation of any right guaranteed by the Constitution of this state or of the United States, that contractual provision or agreement shall be interpreted or construed to preserve the constitutional rights of the person against whom enforcement is sought. If a natural person subject to personal jurisdiction in this state seeks to maintain litigation, arbitration, an administrative proceeding, or a similarly binding proceeding in this state, and if a court of this state finds that granting a claim of forum non conveniens or a related claim violates or would likely lead to the violation of the constitutional rights of the nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute, the claim shall be denied.

(f) Any contractual provision or agreement incapable of being modified or amended in order to preserve the constitutional rights of the parties pursuant to the provisions of this amendment shall be null and void.

(g) Nothing in this amendment shall be interpreted to limit the right of a natural person or entity of this state to voluntarily restrict or limit his, her, or its own constitutional rights by contract or specific waiver consistent with constitutional principles. However, the language of any such contract or other waiver shall be strictly construed in favor of preserving the constitutional rights of the natural person in this state. Further, no Alabama court shall be required by any contract or other obligation entered into by a person or entity to apply or enforce any foreign law.

(h) Except as limited by subsection (g), without prejudice to any legal right, this amendment shall not apply to a corporation, partnership, limited liability company, business association, or other legal entity that contracts to subject itself to foreign law in a jurisdiction other than this state or the United States.

(i) Where the public acts, records, or judicial proceedings of another state violate the public policy of the State of Alabama, the State of Alabama shall not give full faith and credit thereto.[2]

[justiceischeap]

12. Isn't all US Law technically based on a foreign law?

Our legal system was borrowed from elsewhere wasn't it?

[packman]

14. That gets a big Yawn

typical Southern shit, still fighting the Civil War, still pandering to the Yahoos with their stars-and-bars decals on their pick-ups. "We ain't cottonin' to no Yankee laws". Hell, let them alone and let them feel good they're roosters doing useless crowing on the barnyard fence- they lost once , they'll lose again in the courts.

[meegbear]

15. But the Bible was written in the Middle East ...

so doesn't that make Biblical law "foreign"?

[safeinOhio]

16. So, can an international criminal

convicted in a foreign country not be deported from Alabama.

The new haven for crooks?