No your point has not been made.
The WTO is OBVIOUSLY superceding the Constitution. Where does the Constitution give an international tribunal authority to tax the American people? Where does it say that people who are not American citizens, are not elected by American citizens and do not operate UNDER the constitution can tax them?
Well, with such knowledge, why didn't the President nominate you for the high court?
Point being, that if the WTO is obviously superceding the Constitution, then nothing can be done about it because the United States, its judiciary, executive and legislative are completely helpless.
OTOH, if it is not superceding the Constitution, but simply effecting an action that is in violation of the Constitution, then the judiciary will so find. If the USSC finds that, in fact, such agreements do not operate outside of the Constitution, then you may learn something you were unaware of before. So my point is valid. That is that such agreements do not create a set of laws that set aside our Constitution, with no recourse.
Where does the Constitution give an international tribunal authority to tax the American people? Where does it say that people who are not American citizens, are not elected by American citizens and do not operate UNDER the constitution can tax them?
That is the issue that would come within the jurisdiction of the federal court system. Since the Constitution gives the President and Congress the authority to make and ratify agreements, and taxes and fines are not specifically excluded from such authority, I would guess the USSC would not find it unconstitutional. Perhaps we should wait and see.
Such things don't bother me because any international agreement whether it be for trade or defense places certain limitations and requirements on all signing parties. Been going on since 1800. Since the US is not self sufficient, it must participate in trade agreements. But if a person is in a union controlled enterprise, I can understand reluctance for such agreements.