“Useless laws weaken the necessary laws.” – Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689 – 1755)
The past week Missouri General Assembly did its utmost to hold back the tide of Sharia and international law cases contaminating our state courts. Yes, that’s sarcasm.
All nuts, all the time.
This has been a right wingnut obsession for quite some time.
HJR 31: things that keep us awake at night worrying, part 2 (February 25, 2011)
Anti-Sharia bigotry in Missouri hides behind a constitutional pretense (March 28, 2012)
HB 1512: definitely not a jobs bill (March 27, 2012)
What does God need with a starship?
“…political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize…” (May 8, 2013)
Ladies and gentlemen, your right wingnut controlled General Assembly (May 9, 2013)
HB 436: nullification – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican (May 10, 2013)
SB 265: tinfoil hats – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican (May 11, 2013)
SB 267, as truly agreed and finally passed on May 8th:
FIRST REGULAR SESSION
[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]
SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR
SENATE BILL NO. 267 [pdf]
97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
To amend chapter 506, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the laws of other countries.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 506, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 506.600, to read as follows:
506.600. 1. This section shall be known as the “Civil Liberties Defense Act”. The Missouri general assembly finds that it shall be the public policy of this state to protect its citizens from the application of foreign laws when the application of a foreign law will result in the violation of a right protected by the constitutions of the state of Missouri and the United States, including, but not limited to, due process, freedom of religion, speech, or press, and any right of privacy.
2. The Missouri general assembly fully recognizes the right to contract freely under the laws of this state, and also recognizes that his right may be reasonably and rationally circumscribed pursuant to the state’s interest to protect and promote rights and privileges protected under the Missouri and United States constitutions, including, but not limited to, due process, freedom of religion, speech, or press, and any right of privacy.
3. As used in this section, the following terms mean:
(1) “Court”, any court, board, administrative agency, or other adjudicative or enforcement authority of this state;
(2) “Foreign law, legal code, or system”, any law, legal code, or system of a jurisdiction outside of any state or territory of the United States, including, but not limited to, international organizations and tribunals, and applied by that jurisdiction’s courts, administrative bodies, or other formal or informal tribunals;
(3) “Religious organization”, any church, seminary, synagogue, temple, mosque, religious order, religious corporation, association, or society, whose identity is distinctive in terms of common religious creed, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals, of any faith or denomination, including any organization qualifying as a church or religious organization under section 501(c)(3) or 501(d) of the United States Internal Revenue Code.
4. Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions.
5. A contract or contractual provisions, if capable of segregation, which provides for the choice of a law, legal code, or system to govern some or all of the disputes between the parties adjudicated by a court of law or by an arbitration panel arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the foreign law, legal code, or system chosen includes or incorporates any substantive or procedural law, as applied to the dispute at issue, that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions.
6. (1) A contract or contractual provisions, if capable of segregation, which provides for a jurisdiction for purposes of granting the courts or arbitration panels in personam jurisdiction over the parties to adjudicate any disputes between parties arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the jurisdiction chosen includes any foreign law, legal code, or system, as applied to the dispute at issue, that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions;
(2) If a resident of this state, subject to personal jurisdiction in this state, seeks to maintain litigation, arbitration, agency, or similarly binding proceedings in this state and if the courts of this state find that granting a claim of forum non conveniens or a related claim violates or would likely violate rights protected under the Missouri and United States constitutions of the nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute, then it is the public policy of this state that the claim shall be denied.
7. Without prejudice to any legal right, this act shall not apply to a corporation, partnership, limited liability company, business association, or other legal entity that contracts to subject itself to foreign law in a jurisdiction other than this state or the United States.
8. No court or arbitrator shall interpret this act to limit the right of any person to the free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States constitution and by the constitution of this state. No court shall interpret this act to require or authorize any court to adjudicate, or prohibit any religious organization from adjudicating ecclesiastical matters, including, but not limited to, the election, appointment, calling, dismissal, removal, or excommunication of a member, officer, official, priest, nun, monk, pastor, rabbi, imam, or member of the clergy, of the religious organization, or determination or interpretation of the doctrine of the religious organization, where adjudication by a court would violate the constitution of this state or the prohibition of the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
9. This section shall not be interpreted by any court to conflict with any federal treaty or other international agreement to which the United States is a party to the extent that such treaty or international agreement preempts or is superior to state law on the matter at issue.
[emphasis in original]
….4. Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions….
Ah, that would be the blanket immunity from answering for crimes against humanity clause. I wonder who that was for? Just asking.
Think about that “any foreign law, legal code, or system” phrase for a minute. Apparently America popped into existence fully formed. One minute it wasn’t there, then, “poof”, it was. Go figure.
Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
…In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court…
Great Britain isn’t in the United States and we don’t have a king, right? Apparently we do have a Kenyan born usurper who’s gonna put us all in U.N. mandated FEMA gay marriage camps. But, I digress.
Damn, with one bill the Missouri General Assembly swept away over two hundred years of American legal precedent. They can do that?
In the Journal of the Missouri House for May, 8, 2013:
2267 Journal of the House [pdf]
SS SB 267, relating to the laws of other countries, was taken up by Representative Curtman.
Representative Diehl assumed the Chair.
On motion of Representative Curtman, SS SB 267 was truly agreed to and finally passed by
the following vote:
Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Barnes
Bernskoetter Berry Black Brattin Brown
Burlison Cierpiot Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo
Cox Crawford Cross Curtm an Davis
Diehl Dohrman Dugger Elmer Engler
Entlicher Fitzpatrick Fitzwater Flanigan Fowler
Fraker Frame Franklin Frederick Gannon
Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore Guernsey Haahr
Hampton Hansen Harris Hicks Higdon
Hinson Hoskins Hough Houghton Hurst
Johnson Jones 50 Justus Keeney Kelley 127
Koenig Kolkmeyer Korman Lair Lant
Lauer Leara Love Lynch Marshall
McGaugh Messenger Miller Molendorp Moon
Morris Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson
Pfautsch Phillips Pike Pogue Redmon
Rehder Reiboldt Remole Rhoads Richardson
Riddle Roorda Ross Rowden Rowland
Schatz Schieber Schieffer Shull Shumake
Smith 120 Solon Sommer Spencer Stream
Swan Thomson Torpey Walker White
Wieland Wilson Wood Mr Speaker
Anders Burns Butler Carpenter Colona
Conway 10 Curtis Dunn Ellinger Ellington
English Hodges Hubbard Hummel Kirkton
LaFaver May McCann Beatty McDonald McKenna
McManus McNeil Meredith Mitten Montecillo
Morgan Newman Nichols Norr Otto
Pace Peters Pierson Rizzo Runions
Schupp Smith 85 Swearingen Walton Gray Webb
ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 011
Funderburk Gardner Haefner Kelly 45 Kratky
Lichtenegger McCaherty Mims Scharnhorst Webber
Representative Diehl declared the bill passed.
Well, Representative Dean Dohrman (r) and Representative Denny Hoskins (r) were three for three when it came to right wingnut dogma this past week. Nope, no moderates around there.