I'm frankly puzzeled. Our Constitution is the law of the land, therefore the "Authority of the United States". Any treaty that exceeds the authority granted by the Constitution cannot be ratified as it is illegal from inception.
Can this actually be interpreted any other way?
Read later
> Can this actually be interpreted any other way?
No, I can't see any _sane_ way that it could be.
Don't be puzzled. In order to believe that treaties trump the Constitution, one must (almost) necessarily believe that the Constitution authorizes treaties to trump itself. Ponder that for a moment.