[PapaBear3625]

A treaty is a treaty. The US Constitution has strict requirements for passage that requires Senate ratification. If it’s not a Treaty then it cannot be enforced if it violates other Constitutional guarantees.

The thread which SisterK references in #10, is about whether the Vienna Convention treaty, which the US ratified a while back, covers subsequent UN agreements. In other words whether, by ratifying the Vienna treaty, the US bound ourselves to treaties formed by the UN afterwards. In my opinion, this would be unconstitutional.

[Gaffer]

To infer a transferable obligation to me would require re-ratification...said simply, “it should have been in the treaty if it was so damned important.”

Further, a current body cannot obligate a future one, save only for passed law (and not ruled Unconstitutional by the SC), Constitutional Amendments, or for those instances dictated by the Constitution, duly ratified treaties being one.