The most important reason to oppose Ogden’s nomination is his belief that the rules found in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child are already binding on the United States under the doctrines of international law.
In the Supreme Court case of Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), Ogden argued in a brief that the rules banning the juvenile death penalty contained in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child were customary norms of international law “binding on all states.”
...
This means that Ogden believes that the legal rules contained in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child are already binding on the United States, even though this treaty has never been sent to the U.S. Senate for ratification.
Homeschoolers have long understood the dangers of this international treaty, which contains the core principle that the government may decide what it believes is best for each child without any proof of wrongdoing by the child’s parents. Ogden promoted the use of this UN treaty in the Supreme Court to reach the conclusion that America’s courts have the power to overrule state law, using international law as their guidepost for constitutional interpretation. Unfortunately, he was successful in doing so in the Roper case.
No comments:
Post a Comment