Provides relative to the application of foreign laws. (8/15/10)
Impact
The enactment of SB 460 will have a significant effect on how contracts involving foreign laws are interpreted and enforced in Louisiana. By ensuring that any foreign law that may infringe upon constitutionally guaranteed rights is rendered void, the bill provides a strong legal framework to uphold the rights of Louisiana citizens. This legislation is likely to influence various contracts related to international business, divorce, and family law, where foreign jurisdictions have been referenced. Furthermore, it establishes a precedent for local courts to reject foreign laws that potentially undermine state constitutional guarantees.
Summary
Senate Bill 460 introduces regulations concerning the application of foreign laws in Louisiana, establishing that foreign laws cannot be enforced if they contravene the constitutional rights guaranteed under both the state and federal constitutions. This bill aims to protect the legal rights of individuals by prohibiting courts, arbitrators, or administrative bodies from enforcing any foreign law that could result in violations of these rights such as due process and freedom of religion. The legislation explicitly addresses situations where contractual agreements specify the application of foreign law or choice of venue, ensuring that such choices are modified to align with constitutional protections.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB 460 appears to reflect a strong endorsement from proponents who see it as a crucial measure for safeguarding individual rights against foreign legal systems that could conflict with American values. Supporters emphasize the importance of maintaining sovereignty in legal matters, particularly in family and personal rights contexts. However, potential concerns have been raised regarding the limits this bill may impose on individuals seeking legal recourse through international contracts, suggesting that there may be factions that view the bill as overly restrictive in certain circumstances.
Contention
A notable point of contention in the discussion of SB 460 revolves around balancing state sovereignty and the complexity of international legal obligations. Critics may argue that while protecting individual rights is paramount, this bill could hinder the ability of individuals and businesses to navigate international contracts effectively. The provision that nullifies any contractual clauses that cannot be reconciled with constitutional rights may raise concerns among those in the legal and business communities who advocate for clearer pathways to enforce such contracts without state interference. Additionally, there could be apprehension about how this bill will be applied in cases where foreign laws are widely accepted and may provide necessary legal frameworks.