Monday

Constitution vs. Treaty

Constitution vs. Treaty

Art Telles //
Posted on TheForceOfReason.com Oct 20, 2009 at 1:54 am

The U. S. Constitution vs. Treaty…

Hi jdam,

At 1hr. 33min. 47sec. Lord Monckton says,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0 
Lord Christopher Monckton speaks on October 14th, 2009 at a climate skeptic event sponsored by the Minnesota Free Market Institute. 

“… the trouble is this, if that treaty is signed, your constitution says that it [ the treaty ] takes precedence over your constitution.

“And you can’t resile [can't recoil] from that treaty unless your get the agreement of all the other states parties.

“And because you’ll be the biggest paying country, they’re not going to let you out.”

Lord Mocknton is not correct in saying
>> ‘… your constitution says that it [ the treaty ] takes precedence over your constitution.’

The U.S. Constitution ALWAYS takes precedence over any treaty… the constitution is THE authority that gives ANY treaty authority.

Jeremy Rabkin from George Mason University spoke at Hillsdale College about sovereignty, and it was printed in the July/August 2009 issue of Imprimis.

The Constitution and American Sovereignty

>http://www.hillsdale.edu/images/userImages/jcarr/Page_4221/ImprimisJulyAug09.pdf

“The Constitution provides for treaties, and even specifies that treaties will be “the supreme Law of the Land”; that is, that they will be binding on the states.

“But from 1787 on, it has been recognized that for a treaty to be valid,
>> “it must be consistent with the Constitution —
>> “that the Constitution is a higher authority than treaties.

“And what is it that allows us to judge whether
>> a treaty is consistent with the Constitution?

“Alexander Hamilton explained this in a pamphlet early on:
” ‘A treaty cannot change the frame of the government.’

“And he gave a very logical reason:
>> “It is the Constitution that authorizes us to make treaties.

“If a treaty violates the Constitution, it would be like an agent betraying his principal or authority. ”
Re: “…betraying his principal or authority” and the ‘IMPEACHMENT’ word… for rejecting and subverting the authority of the U.S. Constitution.

If, as President, Obama signs the treaty to surrender possession of U.S. sovereignty to an international body… IMPEACHMENT is the constitutional next step because by ceding U.S. sovereignty, Obama is NOT protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States.

So, a treaty that cedes U.S. sovereignty automatically can NOT be binding… and impeachment proceeding for ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ MUST begin immediately… if the whimpy Republicans are up for a constitutional fight!!!

You can read the article on the original Hillsdale College Imprimis pdf, or on my Lift Up America blog where I highlighted the relevant points.

Art

Lift Up America... Again!!!

My photo
El Paso, Texas, United States