Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cletus.D.Yokel; SoothingDave
You're both right: here's Article Vi, paragraph 2 of the Constitution:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Treaties are on equal footing with the Constitution: that said, there would undoubtedly be a huge court fight were this treaty to become ratified, because there are certainly conflicts between Amendment 2 and this piece of UN crap.

As we all know, the liberals want to 'back door' their agendas via treaty... in my opinion, we need a new Constitutional amendment that provides US citizens (however THAT term might be defined now) with protection vis-a-vis language that sez "no provision of any treaty made with any foreign powers, interests, or sovereign nation shall be construed to interfere or subvert any provision of the Constitution of the United States of America."

11 posted on 09/20/2012 6:34:37 AM PDT by alancarp (Liberals are all for shared pain... until they're included in the pain group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: alancarp

The Constitutional position would be that the treaty would be an illegal modification to the 2nd Amendment in violation of Article 5.


12 posted on 09/20/2012 6:44:17 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: alancarp
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Treaties are on equal footing with the Constitution

No, they are not. They may be on an equal footing with federal law. The ranking, as per the above, is

(1) US Constitution

(2) Federal law and treaties

(3) State Constitutions

(4) State law.

The part about "any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding" refers only to STATE constitutions, not the federal constitution.

19 posted on 09/20/2012 7:23:09 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (Charlie Daniels - Payback Time http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWwTJj_nosI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: alancarp
In Missouri v. Holland, the Supreme court ruled on the subject.

Treaty trumps state law. Later treaty trumps earlier federal law. Later federal law trumps earlier treaty if it is clear that it is meant to do so.

22 posted on 09/20/2012 7:28:07 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (Charlie Daniels - Payback Time http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWwTJj_nosI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: alancarp

Maybe we should just refuse to sign treaties and end all these entangling alliances.

Maybe when outraged Americans do worse to the UN and the denizens therein than what the Muzzies did in Cairo and Benghazi to us then this nonsense will stop.

As far as the UN’s people? I want them dead, I want their families dead, I want their Secretariat building burned to the ground.


24 posted on 09/20/2012 7:29:29 AM PDT by Emperor Palpatine ("On the ascent of Olympus, what's a botched bar or two?" -Artur Schnabel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson