The Supreme Court's senior justice told a meeting of the Seventh Circuit Bar Association that it's right for the Supreme Court to consider foreign courts views when interpreting the United States Constitution.

Justice John Paul Stevens -- and the other justices who have shown themselves to susceptible to peer pressure -- shouldn't be sitting on the high court. As Justice Antonin Scalia has repeatedly, and persuasively, pointed out, justices who resort to foreign law to support their decisions on what the U.S. Constitution means are merely cherry-picking legal support.

Just about every country in the world -- including and especially European countries -- has tougher rules on abortion than does the United States. I'm taking bets that when the Supreme Court decides this latest abortion case this fall that none of the court's liberal justices resort to foreign law to restrict the United States' unfettered abortion rights.

Be sure to carefully note the way I phrased that bet -- I wouldn't put it past Scalia to sarcastically and obnoxiously to base a dissent on foreign law, just to highlight his colleagues' dishonest use of the tactic.