I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 1658 
To ensure that the courts interpret the Constitution in the manner that 
the Framers intended. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
APRIL 14, 2005 
Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 
on the Judiciary 
A BILL 
To ensure that the courts interpret the Constitution in the 
manner that the Framers intended. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Justice for 
Americans Citizens Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
The Congress finds the following: 
(1) The Constitution of the United States, Arti-
cle VI, states that the Constitution shall be the su-
preme law of the land and that every Senator, Rep-
resentative, and every executive and judicial officer 
of the United States and of the several States, shall 
be bound by oath to faithfully discharge and perform 
their duties in conformity to the Constitution. 
(2) Although the Framers of the Constitution 
drew from a wide range of political and legal sources 
in the drafting of its various provisions, they delib-
erately designed the Constitution as a unique na-
tional instrument to govern the elected and ap-
pointed officials of the United States and of the sev-
eral States and their political subdivisions. 
(3) The Constitution was originally ordained 
and ratified by the people of the United States so 
the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of the 
Federal and State governments would be exercised 
in accordance with the fixed and enduring principles 
of the Constitution, as it was ratified by the peoples’ 
representatives in accordance with Article VII of the 
Constitution, and as stated more than 200 years ago 
by Chief Justice of the United States John Marshall 
in Marbury v. Madison. 
(4) Departing from fidelity to the original con-
stitutional text, the Federal judiciary has increas-
ingly disregarded the will of the American people, 
transforming constitutional principles that were
originally designed by the people to be permanent 
into a set of evolving standards subject to change by 
judicial opinion, and thereby undermining the Amer-
ican people’s right to establish a government accord-
ing to written constitutional provisions ratified by 
their elected representatives in constitutional conven-
tion. 
(5) The Supreme Court of the United States in 
Atkins v. Virginia and Lawrence v. Texas found in-
dividual ‘‘constitutional’’ rights that are directly con-
trary to the American common-law tradition when it 
employed a new technique of interpretation called 
‘‘transjudicialism’’: the reliance by American judges 
upon foreign judicial and other legal sources outside 
of American constitutional law. 
(6) 
Under 
this 
new 
system 
of 
‘‘transjudicialism’’ or ‘‘global law’’, individual jus-
tices of the Supreme Court of the United States 
have publicly stated they expect American courts to 
increasingly base their opinions interpreting the 
Constitution in light of ‘‘international law’’ or 
‘‘transnational law’’, thereby amending the Constitu-
tion from an expression of ‘‘We the People of the 
United States’’ to an expression of the will of 
judges.
(7) The American people are rightfully entitled 
to be governed by the Constitution, not as amended 
by judges through the process of ‘‘transjudicialism’’, 
but as amended by the process set forth in Article 
V of the Constitution. 
(8) To the end that the amendment process 
provided for in Article V of the Constitution is pre-
served, and that the Federal courts exercise only ju-
dicial power as vested in them by the people, Con-
gress has the power under Article I, section 8, clause 
18 and Article III, sections 1 and 2, to regulate the 
Federal courts. 
SEC. 3. INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION. 
Neither the Supreme Court of the United States nor 
any lower Federal court shall, in the purported exercise 
of judicial power to interpret and apply the Constitution 
of the United States, employ the constitution, laws, ad-
ministrative rules, executive orders, directives, policies, or 
judicial decisions of any international organization or for-
eign state, except for the English constitutional and com-
mon law or other sources of law relied upon by the Fram-
ers of the Constitution of the United States. 
Æ