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

To: xm177e2
I'd probably vote for the Bricker - it would solve a lot of the other problems as well.

Interesting question...

LQ
2 posted on 02/25/2004 11:46:44 AM PST by LizardQueen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: All
I support the 17th
19 posted on 02/25/2004 12:08:41 PM PST by The Wizard (democrats are enemies of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: LizardQueen
The Bricker amendment? For what purpose? I thought Boortz is a lawyer.

"It need hardly be said that a treaty cannot change the Constitution or be held valid if it be in violation of that instrument." The Cherokee Tobacco, 11 Wall. ( 78 U.S.), 616, 620 (1871).

"It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights--let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition--to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V." - 354 U.S. 1 (1957)

"The treaty is . . . a law made by the proper authority, and the courts of justice have no right to annul or disregard any of its provisions, unless they violate the Constitution of the United States." Doe v. Braden, 57 U.S. (16 How.) 635, 656 (1853)

44 posted on 02/26/2004 8:23:56 AM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | 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