Posted on 09/25/2013 5:18:39 AM PDT by SatinDoll
WASHINGTON – Asserting the Senate’s constitutional role on treaties, U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, in a letter today warned the Obama administration against taking any action to implement the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty without Senate advice and consent.
“The ATT raises significant legislative and constitutional questions. Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be fundamentally inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, law, and practice,” said Corker.
Full text of the letter is included below and in the attached document.
Dear President Obama,
It is my understanding that Secretary of State John Kerry will sign the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on behalf of the United States. The ATT raises significant legislative and constitutional questions. Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be inconsistent with the United States Constitution, law, and practice.
As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law. The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent. As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.
Moreover, even after the Senate provides its advice and consent, certain treaties require changes to United States law in the form of legislation passed by both the House and Senate. The ATT is such a treaty. Various provisions of the ATT, including but not limited to those related to the regulation of imports and trade in conventional arms, require such implementing legislation and relate to matters exclusively reserved to Congress under our Constitution.
Because of the concerns discussed above, as well as the fundamental issues the ATT raises with respect to the individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is my view that you may not take any executive action to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, unless and until: (1) the United States Senate has provided its constitutionally required advice and consent to its ratification; and (2) the Congress has passed any and all required legislation to bring this treaty into effect under United States domestic law.
Sincerely,
Senator Bob Corker Ranking Member
This is another attempt at taking away our 2nd amendment rights using sneaky underhanded tactics using incrementalism. The UN wants global gun control. Its part of their NWO marching orders given by Satan himself.
Kerry is about to sign it today, on behalf of the US, as instructed by Obama.
Corker is just playing. He doesnt mean a word of this crap!
Let’s check with a real senator about this.........
Better headline: Limp-wristed RINO seeks to change the subject from Obamacare.
“Signing this treaty is an act of treason”
No, it’s not. Signing the treaty merely means the President will try to get it approved by the Senate so that it can be ratified. Many treaties are signed but not ratified.
Signing by itself means little.
The Rule of Law and the Constitution are dead; no branch of the government recognizes it’s Constitutional obligations or limitations. Nor does the government recognize any restraint on the exercise of power over the individual. The death probably occurred a long time ago but the Supreme Court decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius was certainly the post-mortem.
All that “land of the free” and “our precious liberties” talk is window dressing for kids in second grade. So is Senator Corker’s letter.
As Hannity said yesterday... we have reached the tipping point. I believe that obama’s days of imperial edict are slowly coming to a close.
He’s been advised. He’s on notice. He cannot say he didn’t understand, or know, or any other excuse as he is on notice by this letter, and we the people know as well. IMO it is the purpose of the letter, and most appropriate for the circumstance.
Senator Cruz is occupied at the moment.
Obama's become the earliest "lame duck" President in American history.
I hope Barry tries it so we can finally impeach his sorry butt.
Ya know, In 1994 after the Senate refused to even vote on the UN Biodiversity Treaty (Agenda 21) Clinton wrote EO 12852 directing the implementation of its provisions through domestic regulation.
This has been followed with numerous other EO’s all furthering the implementation of Agenda 21.
This is how it works today...”stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool huh?”
I expect this is the way oBama will enact the UN Arms Treaty. After all the precedent for enacting a treaty via Executive Orders has been set.
“...singing means little”. Really?
Review #33
Can someone confirm this?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/09/john-kerry-signs-u-n-arms-treaty/
No Republicans or even Independents?
Sovereignty? Process?
Since O arms terrorist orgs., would this go before the ICC?
Don’t bring a stick to a gun fight.
Yes, really.
All treaties are signed before they are debated in the Senate. Why would they debate a treaty the executive branch had no interest in?
Not quite sure of your meaning.
The Convention on Biodiversity Treaty was VP Gore’s dream treaty. The Senate was going to ratify it even though the UN lied about the implementing body of it not being written (blank check) Sen. Mitchell was shown the actual document just before the Cloture vote. He pulled it and it has NEVER been ratified to date. Clinton came out with EO 12852 and others since which have served to incorporate the provisions of the Treaty and Agenda 21 in domestic regulations without Congressional approval. Today virtually every federal agency is implementing provisions of Agenda 21.
Still think just signing does not mean much?
“As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution...”
As you know? He’s assuming this so called “constitutional scholar”, who stated that we’re a constitutional democracy, knows what is in the Constitution? He doesn’t!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.