[MarkL]

Isn't NAFTA an "agreement," rather than a treaty, which would have had to be ratified by the senate? I was under the impression that was the case.

If that is the case, then such an "agreement" isn't valid under the Constitution anyway, since there's no such thing mentioned in the Constitution. And it certainly can't superceed any US laws.

Mark

[Toddsterpatriot]

Isn't NAFTA an "agreement," rather than a treaty, which would have had to be ratified by the senate? I was under the impression that was the case.

NAFTA was passed by a majority in the House and Senate.

And it certainly can't superceed any US laws.

You are correct, NAFTA does not have greater authority than the US Constitution. Neither does any treaty.