[follow the money]

a package of 34 treaties, all of which were ratified by a show of hands -- no recorded vote.

[Luke]

Maybe it is time to put some judges in jail.

[firewalk]

bttt

[usapatriot28]

It is their contention that these treaties do not apply to U.S. citizens, even if ratified, until the U.S. Congress has written them into law.

Of course they don't. I'm amazed every time I hear about judges that just disregard the law and rule however the hell they want. A treaty is nothing more than an agreement reached with a foreign nation (or nations) it bears NO legal weight whatsoever. It is just a promise of what we are going to do (or not do). Only once laws are passed that reinforce the treaty, does the treaty have any real meaning. .

Any judge that rules on the basis of a treaty and not US law is violating their charge of trust against the United States. We do still make judges take oaths to uphold the Constitution, right? Impeachment proceedings should begin immediatly against this judge.

[Mister Baredog]

A federal court in New York ordered the INS to give Beharry a hearing, basing its legal authority on the provisions of several international treaties including the Convention on the Right of the Child.

Another "Chuckie boy Schumer" judge strikes again. Why, because he "felt" like it would be the "right" thing to do.

[Ben Ficklin]

It seems very odd that NCPR is publishing this series without any reference to dates or final outcome of the issue.

[Dead Corpse]

A federal court in New York ordered the INS to give Beharry a hearing, basing its legal authority on the provisions of several international treaties including the Convention on the Right of the Child. The U.S. Senate, however, never ratified those treaties.

If a judge cannot follow the clear text of the Constitution, nor be trusted to keep up with what treaties the US has subjected itself to, then they should be impeached and kicked off the bench.

[ThanhPhero]

Treaty be damned! We can deport any alien for any reason. The rest of the world does not have the rights of citizenship in our country. They don't get the vote here either.

[madfly]

ping!

[madfly]

ping

[madfly]

sorry for any double pings. I find this story shocking!

[inquest]

I had to do some digging on this, because I thought there's no way a judge could be this blatant in his disregard for the law. There had to be another side to the story. Well, it turns out I gave him too much credit. From the following site, we have this quote from Judge Jack Weinstein:

“This nation’s credibility would be weakened by non-compliance with treaty obligations or with international norms. The United States seeks to impose international law norms--including, notably, those on terrorism--upon other nations. It would seem strange, then, if the government would seek to avoid enforcement of such norms within its own borders.”

And then comes the real doozie:

“If the statutes are not so interpreted, then in this instance treaties and international law override the statutes and require such a hearing.”

My friends, we are entering completely uncharted territories of hubris.

[Poohbah]

It is their contention that these treaties do not apply to U.S. citizens, even if ratified, until the U.S. Congress has written them into law.

Their contention is off-target.

Ratification of a treaty is writing that treaty into law.