by Carrie Severino
In her confirmation hearings, Elena Kagan was careful to avoid passing judgment on any sitting Supreme Court Justice or any court case, past, present, or future. Justice Ginsburg, from her position on the Court, obviously does not feel so constrained. Last Friday she joined the fray in defense of Elena Kagan’s statements during her confirmation hearings and took several Senators to task for suggesting that American judges should limit themselves to considering American law and that reliance on foreign law is ahistorical.
Her speech to the International Academy of Comparative Law at American University was entitled “A Decent Respect to the Opinions of [Human]kind,” a modified reference to the Declaration of Independence which enumerated the colonies’ reasons for throwing off British rule because “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” Her title alone is telling, because Ginsburg’s attempt to ground her approach to foreign and international law in the nation’s founding and early history is, as Eugene Kontorovich has pointed out, founded on a complete misconstruction of the sentence and its context. The Declaration of Independence is not making a point about the sources of authority in American law, but is framing itself as an appeal to natural law in an effort to win the support of other nations – namely France – in the struggle for independence. It addresses an American explanation of our actions to other nations, not an American respect for foreign opinions that would impel us to alter our own law.