The Right to Bear Arms Deconstructed in the light of an Ukaze from the Dutchy of Grand Fenwick.

Supreme Court watchers have been outraged - well, ok, I've been outraged - by the easy way that SCUSA has come to rely upon the conventions of non-sovereign foreign ectoplasms, such as the United Nations, to construe American organic law. Given the fact that such
"legislation" is (a) not democratically enacted, (b) framed by entities over which there is no democratic oversight, (c) unrelated to any possible intent of any possible framer of any American law and (d) unrelated to the local and parochial interests of local American communities, the emanations of such fictitious entities ought to have the same relationship to constitutional jurisprudence as would a random belch of Benito Mussolini or a rescript from the Holy Roman Empire. But there is a disturbing trend that a number of justices subscribe to the notion that foreign laws should inform the interpretation of the Constitution (at least, that is, as Jockulocracy observes, until the Charter of the Galactic Federation is approved.)

Here's an informative essay by Sandy Schulz that discusses this trend and why we should be disturbed by it.