Neil Addison at the Religion Law blog, has taken a look at the Supremem Court's refusal to review a decision of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals concerning the possibility of prosecuting the Holy See in the US courts. He concludes that it is
not as important as it appears. I give his summary of the court's decision below, but the article contains further details.
- The Holy See is a Sovereign State under US Law
- The Holy See can only be sued in the US on the same basis as any Sovereign State and enjoys exactly the same immunity from suit as any other Sovereign State
- Catholic Diocese and Organisations in the US are not “Agents or Instrumentalities” of the Holy See and the Holy See cannot be held liable for their actions
- The Holy See can only be sued with respect to the Acts of its “employees” and not for the acts of Catholic Priests etc generally
(Thanks to Karen for correcting my earlier version of this post.)
3 comments:
Sure, they try and prosecute the Holy See but the Senate turns around and says BP cannot be prosecuted.
The irony is rich!
Actually Fr. the Supreme court didn't rule -- the 9th circuit court DECLINED to pass it on to the Supreme court on the grounds that were mentioned. [And if the 9th "Circus court" as it is often called got this one right, it's proof positive that "Doe's suit" doesn't have a hope in Hades. (The 9th Circuit court is considered "Stupidsville" by almost everyone who believes that the constitution and laws are what was legislated, not what some goofball liberal wants them to be.]
You missed the line in the article:
"9th Circuit Court of Appeals (NOT the United States Supreme Court) has decided"
as well as: "Finally on the issue of the Supreme Court refusing to review the 9th Circuits decision (refusing 'cert' ) this is not unusual in the circumstances of this case where as yet there has been no trial and no findings of fact. No Appellate Court likes to deal with cases, such as this, where there have no been any findings of fact and where the decision of the 9th Circuit is not (so far as I can see) in conflict with any decision by any other Circuit. Refusing cert in these circumstances does not mean that the Supreme Court necessarily agrees or disagrees with the 9th Circuit merely that the case has not yet reached a stage which is appropriate for adjudication by the Supreme Court."
In other words, this "Doe" fellow can still appeal to the Supreme court -- the odds of the Supreme court accepting the case and ruling for the guy is NIL.
Thanks very much, Karen. Must read things more carefully...
I've corrected the post.
Post a Comment