Explain to me how the Supreme Court is kept out when it decides it has jurisdiction. It's pretty much established law that the US government can't void Constitutional protections/ provisions by treaty.
More than one treaty has had provisions clipped by a court.
Part of Article VI 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.
Does this clause place treaties on the same level with the constitution as the "supreme Law of the Land?" Higher? the phrase "any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding" is a very dangerous phrase if interpreted in certain ways.
If so, does it not follow that there can be treaties which are inconsistent with the constitutional terms? Could they by treaty take away our right to gun ownership? To petition against illegal immigration, etc?
My concern is that a president will enter into a treaty, and 2/3 of the Senate will ratify it, an it will erode our constitutional rights. Has this issue been dealt with in the context of treaties which, for example, provide for trials that do not include our constitutional rights?
I am concerned that the various trade agreements made or to be made in the future will be the route by which our national life is irreparably harmed.
More than one treaty has had provisions clipped by a court.
Exactly. Another conspiracy theory that doesn't hold water.
Considering today's combative politics I don't think one has to worry much about any conspiracy sneaking in while the citizens of the U.S. are sleeping.
No unconstitutional treaty is going to trump our Constitution without a war never before imagined in the history of politics.
Yes, and remember NAFTA is not even a treaty....