Quote

The United States and the European Union do want to have a rule of law, and that rule of law should be for a fair trial. And that fair trial needs to have an impartial jury.

I believe an international criminal court is very much to be desired.

Americans have grown a great deal more realistic about lawyers and the law. I think that's all for the good. A lot of people will say to you these days, 'If you are looking for justice, don't go to a courtroom.' That's just a more realistic perspective on what happens in the legal process.

What if we move to a path to legalization? How do we reconcile that with justice and fairness with those that come here legally?

My sense is that jurists from other nations around the world understand that our court occupies a very special place in the American system, and that the court is rather well regarded in comparison, perhaps, to their own.

There is a movement to get an international criminal court in the world, voted for by hundreds of states-but with the noticeable absence of the United States of America.

I think we are realizing that we are going to have to have an international rule of law.

To say that because of someone's heritage or their ethnicity that they are unable to provide fair judgement is just wrong. It's just not how the judicial system works in our country and not how it ever can work.

Our first concern is the security of the lawyers because without security you can't possibly have a fair trial, if trial at all, and that's not been adequately attended to.

But I can tell that once, and if, and when this issue gets to be, under real terms, investigated, you will be seeing certain people that we know from this country standing trial; and they will be prosecuted criminally.