- The law of nations is the great source from which we derive those
rules, respecting belligerent and neutral rights, which are recognized by
all civilized and commercial states throughout Europe and America. This
law is in part unwritten, and in part conventional. To ascertain that
which is unwritten, we resort to the great principles of reason and
justice: but, as these principles will be differently understood by
different nations under different circumstances, we consider them as
being, in some degree, fixed and rendered stable by a s[e]ries of
judicial decisions. The decisions of the Courts of every country, so far
as they are founded upon a law common to every country, will be received,
not as authority, but with respect. The decisions of the Courts of every
country show how the law of nations, in the given case, is understood in
that country, and will be considered in adopting the rule which is to
prevail in this.
Jack Balkin
At 12:00 AM 8/5/2003 -0700, you wrote:
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:10:04 -0700
From: Robert Sheridan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Referring to Foreign Law
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
I was [a little] surprised to see the objection by Scalia to referring to
foreign law as some authority, and, if memory serves, Thomas as well in a
different case.
