In so doing it also emasculates the sovereign rights of small countries that have long been the prime defenders of multilateralism and international law as well as the foremost policy innovators.

Why do they take the position that they are defenders of human rights and we should respond to their requirements?

Now, I have long been a vigorous defender of free markets.

Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.

How, the Court's defenders asked, could the Court not rule in the increasingly tolerant and cosmopolitan mid-20th century, that state-enforced racial segregation violated the Constitution?