Obama could rely upon a star chamber of Senators to ratify this treaty. Goodbye 2nd Amendment Rights. I KNOW there are doubters out there, so fire away.
Carryokie has raised on more than one occasion an important warning. Treaties need only 2 out of ANY 3 senators to agree with the president (no quorum necessary), and the treaty is law.
If that is not bad enough, the constitution states that treaties supersede all laws AND the constitution.
I can provide “line and verse” to anyone who wants me to prove this. It can be stopped if enough of us are aware of it. And there’s nothing in the constitution that says we MUST stick with an unpopular treaty forever when enough of us can impress our congresscritters with our dissatifaction.
Could you kindly direct me to that section of our USC? I am not certain that is in Article VI.
No it does not. Treaties supercede *State* constitutions and laws, but not the federal Constitution.
To believe otherwise reflects a belief that the founders couldn't parse a simple English sentence.
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.
NOT
any Thing in (the Constitution)or (Laws of any State)
“If that is not bad enough, the constitution states that treaties supersede all laws AND the constitution.”
“This constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land”
How do you get “supercede” from the quote I made above? Check Article VI paragraph 2 of the US Constitution to find where I got that quote from.