IV 
108TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. RES. 568
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that judicial determina-
tions regarding the meaning of the laws of the United States should 
not be based on judgments, laws, or pronouncements of foreign institu-
tions unless such foreign judgments, laws, or pronouncements inform 
an understanding of the original meaning of the laws of the United 
States. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 17, 2004
Mr. FEENEY (for himself, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. RYUN of Kansas, Mr. KING 
of Iowa, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. SHADEGG, 
Mr. HOSTETTLER, Mr. PITTS, Mr. HERGER, Mr. FORBES, Mrs. JO ANN 
DAVIS of Virginia, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. DELAY, Mr. BARTLETT 
of Maryland, Mrs. MUSGRAVE, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. OTTER, Mr. AKIN, Mr. 
JONES of North Carolina, Mr. CRANE, Ms. HARRIS, Mr. SMITH of New 
Jersey, Ms. HART, Mr. PICKERING, Mr. KELLER, Mr. TIAHRT, Mrs. 
BLACKBURN, Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. 
GOODE, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, 
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mrs. 
CUBIN, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. TANCREDO, Mr. CAMP, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. 
CANTOR, Mr. CHOCOLA, Mr. KLINE, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. SMITH of 
Michigan, Mr. ISTOOK, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky, Ms. 
GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida, Mr. CANNON, Mr. PENCE, Mr. SEN-
SENBRENNER, Mr. OSE, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. TOOMEY, Mr. ROGERS 
of Alabama, Mr. RENZI, and Mr. FLAKE) submitted the following resolu-
tion; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 
RESOLUTION 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 
judicial determinations regarding the meaning of the 
laws of the United States should not be based on judg-
•HRES 568 IH 
ments, laws, or pronouncements of foreign institutions 
unless such foreign judgments, laws, or pronouncements 
inform an understanding of the original meaning of the 
laws of the United States.
Whereas the Declaration of Independence announced that one 
of the chief causes of the American Revolution was that 
King George had ‘‘combined to subject us to a jurisdic-
tion foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by 
our laws’’; 
Whereas the Supreme Court has recently relied on the judg-
ments, laws, or pronouncements of foreign institutions to 
support its interpretations of the laws of the United 
States, most recently in Lawrence v. Texas, 123 S.Ct. 
2472, 2474 (2003); 
Whereas the Supreme Court has stated previously in Printz 
v. United States, 521 U.S. 898, 921 n.11 (1997), that 
‘‘We think such comparative analysis inappropriate to the 
task of interpreting a constitution . . .’’; 
Whereas Americans’ ability to live their lives within clear 
legal boundaries is the foundation of the rule of law, and 
essential to freedom; 
Whereas it is the appropriate judicial role to faithfully inter-
pret the expression of the popular will through laws en-
acted by duly elected representatives of the American 
people and our system of checks and balances; 
Whereas Americans should not have to look for guidance on 
how to live their lives from the often contradictory deci-
sions of any of hundreds of other foreign organizations; 
and 
Whereas inappropriate judicial reliance on foreign judgments, 
laws, or pronouncments threatens the sovereignty of the
•HRES 568 IH 
United States, the separation of powers and the Presi-
dent’s and the Senate’s treaty-making authority: Now, 
therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep-
resentatives that judicial determinations regarding the 
meaning of the laws of the United States should not be 
based in whole or in part on judgments, laws, or pro-
nouncements of foreign institutions unless such foreign 
judgments, laws, or pronouncements are incorporated into 
the legislative history of laws passed by the elected legisla-
tive branches of the United States or otherwise inform an 
understanding of the original meaning of the laws of the 
United States.
Æ