[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 473 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 473

  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that judicial 
determinations regarding the meaning of the Constitution of the United 
  States should not be based on judgments, laws, or pronouncements of 
     foreign institutions unless such foreign judgments, laws, or 
 pronouncements inform an understanding of the original meaning of the 
                   Constitution of the United States.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2009

Mr. Goodlatte (for himself, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. Franks of Arizona, 
 Mr. Gohmert, Mr. Blunt, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Cantor, Mr. 
  Poe of Texas, Mr. Bishop of Utah, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Mack, Mr. 
Jones, Mr. Culberson, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Posey, Mr. Wolf, Mr. 
Forbes, and Mr. Wittman) submitted the following resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that judicial 
determinations regarding the meaning of the Constitution of the United 
  States should not be based on judgments, laws, or pronouncements of 
     foreign institutions unless such foreign judgments, laws, or 
 pronouncements inform an understanding of the original meaning of the 
                   Constitution of the United States.

Whereas the Declaration of Independence announced that one of the chief causes 
        of the American Revolution was that King George had ``combined to 
        subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and 
        unacknowledged by our laws'';
Whereas the Supreme Court has recently relied on the judgments, laws, or 
        pronouncements of foreign institutions to support its interpretations of 
        the laws of the United States, most recently in Lawrence v. Texas, 123 
        S.Ct. 2472, 2474 (2003);
Whereas the Supreme Court has stated previously in Printz v. United States, 521 
        U.S. 898, 921 n.11 (1997), that ``We think such comparative analysis 
        inappropriate to the task of interpreting a constitution . . .'';
Whereas Americans' ability to live their lives within clear legal boundaries is 
        the foundation of the rule of law, and essential to freedom;
Whereas it is the appropriate judicial role to faithfully interpret the 
        expression of the popular will through the Constitution and laws enacted 
        by duly elected representatives of the American people and our system of 
        checks and balances;
Whereas Americans should not have to look for guidance on how to live their 
        lives from the often contradictory decisions of any of hundreds of other 
        foreign organizations; and
Whereas inappropriate judicial reliance on foreign judgments, laws, or 
        pronouncments threatens the sovereignty of the United States, the 
        separation of powers and the President's and the Senate's treaty-making 
        authority: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
judicial interpretations regarding the meaning of the Constitution of 
the United States should not be based in whole or in part on judgments, 
laws, or pronouncements of foreign institutions unless such foreign 
judgments, laws, or pronouncements inform an understanding of the 
original meaning of the Constitution of the United States.
                                 <all>