The Founding Fathers believed that the United States of America and her individual states should never be subservient to any foreign power or legal system, and that no foreign legal system or foreign policy should be allowed to encroach upon our rights that are protected by the federal or state Constitutions.

In passing Texas Laws for Texas Courts (TLTC, known nationally as American Law for American Courts or ALAC), we are preserving the individual rights of all citizens and the liberties and freedoms protected by the Constitution of the State of Texas.

Furthermore, TLTC prevents encroachment from any foreign law/policy or transnationalism that would impact Texas citizens when they enter a Texas courtroom. For example, the outcome of a family legal proceeding related to marriage, divorce, or parent-child relationships (collectively comprising 90% of all foreign law cases in this nation and in Texas) would be compromised by allowing foreign law or transnational policies. In virtually every case that foreign law is applied, it is to the detriment of women and children. TLTC would safeguard against the misapplied use of comity of foreign judgments, choice of law clauses, and choice of foreign forum clauses, and would explicitly prevent targeting those from other races and religions, etc., to protect their constitutional rights.

Texas, like all states and our nation as a whole, has a process that has given us the rules and policies by which we govern and live our lives. The three branches—executive, legislative, and judicial—are to be a balance of authority and guidance to benefit the citizenry. This system is to provide safeguards to the balance of power and to prevent overreaching and/or judicial activism.

Our state legislative body has a vital role to play in preserving constitutional rights and Texan values of liberty and freedom. This is not a role to be left to the courts.

Texas Laws for Texas Courts is facially neutral: it does not single out any specific religion or foreign nation; it does not apply to corporations, nor does it affect international contracts or international trade laws or treaties. In the most practical application, this law is about safeguarding Texans' constitutional rights.

The concerns of foreign law creeping into our court systems are valid through two streams: a transnational mindset and documented court cases where foreign law has been applied. As mentioned earlier, one of the most obvious occurrences of foreign law has presented itself in marriage and family law issues. A study of foreign law cases can be reviewed at shariahinamericancourts.com, with over 50 sample cases from appellate courts (this is only listing cases from the appellate level and higher).

Transnationalism (laws applied from other countries or international organizations such as United Nations) has surfaced across our nation. Notable instances include the Massachusetts Supreme Court's citing of Canadian Law in their overturning the definition of marriage case, and the U.S. Supreme Court's (Lawrence vs. Texas) citing European Court of Human Rights in the decision to strike down a statute in Texas and 14 other states.

On numerous occasions, U. S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg touts the validity of using international law in her assessing and assigning opinions in the Court. "Why Obama Loves Ginsberg" (by Jan LaRue, The American Thinker, 2/11/12) gives insight into Ginsberg's progressive thinking. Whether or not one agrees with the court's final decision is not the issue; we have a governing system containing checks and balances within our nation, specifically designed for the protection of our sovereignty undergirded by our constitution at the national and state level.

TLTC does not discriminate or target any specific religion, race, or class, but it does protect ALL citizens by ensuring that they are guaranteed equality in a courtroom, regardless of their social or economic status. One would think the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) would endorse this legislation wholeheartedly; instead, they are its strongest opponents. Legislation that stands to safeguard equality and ensures that each voice is represented begs the question, "To which constitutional right does ACLU, ADL or CAIR not want guaranteed to ALL?"

The passage of Texas Law for Texas Courts leaves no question that Constitutional rights will be guaranteed to all her citizens. Thus, no individuals are excluded from its application in the courtroom, all are protected from encroachment of foreign laws, and our sovereignty is upheld.

*Article by Trayce Bradford

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.