Another terrifying Obama pick

Discussion in 'Politics' started by John_Wensink, Mar 31, 2009.

  1. I wonder who is really pulling the strings?

    I am by no means a conspiracy nut but I think Obama is merely the mouthpiece (teleprompter) for somebody who is behind the scenes calling the shots.

    March 30, 2009
    Obama nominee sees no "reason why sharia law would not be applied to govern a case in the United States"

    Big fan of "transnational legal process"

    On top of that, this Obama pick believes that "America's focus on the War on Terror [is] 'obsessive.'" And his list of countries that flagrantly disregard international law highlights North Korea, Iraq, and the U.S.A. -- which he collectively calls "the axis of disobedience."

    "Obama's most perilous legal pick," by Meghan Clyne for the New York Post, March 30 (thanks to Doc Washburn):

    JUDGES should interpret the Constitution according to other nations' legal "norms." Sharia law could apply to disputes in US courts. The United States constitutes an "axis of disobedience" along with North Korea and Saddam-era Iraq.

    Those are the views of the man on track to become one of the US government's top lawyers: Harold Koh.

    President Obama has nominated Koh -- until last week the dean of Yale Law School -- to be the State Department's legal adviser. In that job, Koh would forge a wide range of international agreements on issues from trade to arms control, and help represent our country in such places as the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.

    It's a job where you want a strong defender of America's sovereignty. But that's not Koh. He's a fan of "transnational legal process," arguing that the distinctions between US and international law should vanish.

    What would this look like in a practical sense? Well, California voters have overruled their courts, which had imposed same-sex marriage on the state. Koh would like to see such matters go up the chain through federal courts -- which, in turn, should look to the rest of the world. If Canada, the European Human Rights Commission and the United Nations all say gay marriage should be legal -- well, then, it should be legal in California too, regardless of what the state's voters and elected representatives might say.

    He even believes judges should use this "logic" to strike down the death penalty, which is clearly permitted in the US Constitution.

    The primacy of international legal "norms" applies even to treaties we reject. For example, Koh believes that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child -- a problematic document that we haven't ratified -- should dictate the age at which individual US states can execute criminals. Got that? On issues ranging from affirmative action to the interrogation of terrorists, what the rest of the world says, goes.

    Including, apparently, the world of radical imams. A New York lawyer, Steven Stein, says that, in addressing the Yale Club of Greenwich in 2007, Koh claimed that "in an appropriate case, he didn't see any reason why sharia law would not be applied to govern a case in the United States."

    A spokeswoman for Koh said she couldn't confirm the incident, responding: "I had heard that some guy . . . had asked a question about sharia law, and that Dean Koh had said something about that while there are obvious differences among the many different legal systems, they also share some common legal concepts."

    Score one for America's enemies and hostile international bureaucrats, zero for American democracy.

    Koh has called America's focus on the War on Terror "obsessive." In 2004, he listed countries that flagrantly disregard international law -- "most prominently, North Korea, Iraq, and our own country, the United States of America," which he branded "the axis of disobedience.[...]

    Even though he's up for a State Department job, Koh is a key test case in the "judicial wars." If he makes it through (which he will if he gets even a single GOP vote) the message to the Obama team will be: You can pick 'em as radical as you like.
  2. Note that Shariah law clearly regards all women as second class citizens: A woman's testimony in court is worth half that of a man. A daughter inherits just half as much property as her brothers. Perhaps worst of all; under Shariah, a rape can only be proven in court if the victim can present four Muslim men who personally witnessed the crime.
  3. I'm assuming he would not apply sharia law to the issue of gay marriage. Or homosexual conduct in general.
  4. Come to think of it, Sharia might be quite preferable to many recent U.S. legal decisions......
  5. That's what cracks me up about all this new-found liberal concern for the arab world and islam. Liberals have convinced themselves that Evangelicals plan on burning them at the stake, but they want to promote islam and gloss over how repressive it is.
  6. TGregg


  7. A very disturbing choice in Koh. This is another example of the Dem party allowing radical leftists to further infiltrate the party. They, the Dem party, have the belief that every voice deserves a seat at the table, even the lunatic fringe groups. They couldn't be more wrong!!
  8. This thread gotta be a joke