I wrote a post not too long ago about "defamation of religion" and the United Nations. After reading Steven Groves' excellent article, "Why the U.S. Should Oppose "Defamation of Religions" Resolutions at the United Nations", I am firmly convinced that the First Amendment as we understand it today is in danger. It is well known that Supreme Court justices have increasingly relied upon international law to evaluate and interpret U.S. law. As a result, the U.S. must continue to oppose the United Nations' attempts to make the State the arbiter of religious beliefs. This is serious.
I’m curious as to whether the Justices have deferred to foreign law in the First Amendment (speech) arena. My instinct is that they have not, and will not any time soon. Probably b/c the US is widely viewed as having the most expansive speech rights (and given that some of these rights developed in the time of the founding – i.e., against the backdrop of English laws).
I think people are crying smoke where there’s no evidence yet of fire.
(I guess some sort of resurgence of the Heckler’s veto is possible, but I don’t think we’ve seen much evidence of this.)