“By failing to address that you neglected to cite a treaty that has been voided, you have shown that your post was grossly in error.”
Actually, there was a recent case in one of the western circuits where the EPA was ruled to have exceeded it’s constitutional authority by imposing penalties against a property owner for what I believe was digging on his land.
Also, interesting your article cites and praises the DC/Heller case as an example where the courts got it right. With over 100 million firearms owners in this country there’s no reason to believe a 2/3 treaty vote will simply cause those millions of people to just surrender their guns at the snap of a finger. The legal challenges would be overwhelming and that would include state nullification on a large scale, like we’re beginning to see with the Obamacare ruling.
With the large number of citizens involved, it’s not quite the slam dunk you make it out to be.
The treaty of course should be stopped nevertheless.
That case had nothing whatsoever to do with citation to a treaty. Worse, the case was so egregious as to be worthless as a test. I promise you: there are thousands of instances substantially like it that will stand, differing only by degree. The EPA has plenty of our money for more lawyers.
Also, interesting your article cites and praises the DC/Heller case as an example where the courts got it right.
What does that have to do with a test of a treaty?
As to the rest of your post, you completely underestimate the connivances of the courts over time (not to mention the rulings of an international secretariat) as to how the treaty will be interpreted over time, and especially as regards regulating the manufacture and distribution of ammo.
So, after all that... You have STILL not cited a single treaty that has been voided for its unconstitutional scope.
Nullification is a non-starter. Look up Jefferson Davis's Inaugural in 1861 (he was inaugurated twice, once to the presidency of the provisional Confederate government, and once to the permanent one). It was already a dead idea. That's why the South seceded instead. There is no method or resource for interposition of the States between federal law and the Citizenry, save the 10th Amendment and the People in convention assembled.