It was appalling when the Obama administration recently agreed to let a U.N. agency known for undermining human rights stand in judgment of the United States' human rights record.
The administration submitted a long, critical report of America's record on defending basic rights to the U.N. "Human Rights Council" - an organization which includes many member nations that are themselves gross abusers of human rights. The administration very inappropriately invited the corrupt council to offer "observations and recommendations" on America's performance.
The report complained about America's supposed racial profiling and other "offenses" - as if the U.N. were a fitting judge of any country's policies, much less those of the freest, greatest nation on Earth.
But one especially offensive part of the report defended the federal government's attack on the state of Arizona for enacting a law to fight illegal immigration and protect the state from the bankrupting cost of providing benefits to illegal aliens. Arizona lawmakers enacted that law in response to the federal government's massive failure to uphold immigration law. But the U.S. Justice Department got a federal judge to block the law's enforcement.
The report to the U.N. praised the Obama administration's legal attack on the Arizona law as an attempt to uphold rights, The Associated Press reported.
As you might imagine, that did not sit well with officials in Arizona. Gov. Jan Brewer fired off a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, calling the attack on Arizona's law "downright offensive."
"The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to 'review' by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional," Gov. Brewer wrote.
She is absolutely right. The federal government should not help misguided or corrupt U.N. agencies attack the United States. And it should not use our own court system to oppose sensible state laws that plainly reflect the will of the people.