The Supreme Court Could Be Ruling On The Safety Of All American Rights

Personal Liberty Digest ^ | 10/31/2013 | Sam Rolley

[EBH]

On more than one occasion President Barack Obama or a top Administration official has lamented that the Commander in Chief is not a king or a dictator and is, therefore, unable to ram his progressive policies down the greater American public’s collective throat as quickly as his liberal supporters would like. And on several occasions, the sole hurdle halting the President in his dash toward liberal utopia—or totalitarian hell, depending on whom you ask — has been a pesky 226-year-old document called the Constitution of the United States of America.

But the Obama Justice Department is working to change that.

Attorneys at the Justice Department are currently working to advance a Supreme Court argument that the Federal government should be allowed to invoke international treaties as legal basis for policies that government officials are unable to put into place because they conflict with the Nation’s Constitution.

The Supreme Court is slated to begin hearing oral arguments in United States v Bond early next month — a case in which the court will determine,...

... In short, United States v Bond concerns a woman poisoning her husband’s mistress and, in doing so, violating the international ban on chemical weapons. Per the Constitution, the woman should be prosecuted at the State level — but the Federal government prosecuted her under the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act.

That is the same Act that Syrian Dictator Bashir al-Assad is a accused of violating and is the justification that many war-hungry politicians recently used as basis for a military attack on the Syrian government.

The Constitutional question is whether the Federal government can use treaties that Congress has ratified as Federal policy.

[EBH]

Small battle really, something under the radar for the moment. Now consider they rule this as favorable to the prosecution, what then does that ruling influence in regards to the UN Gun Treaty....?

[MasterGunner01]

“America is at that awkward stage. It’s too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.” - Claire Wolfe.

Not any more. It's getting closer to the flash point as we speak. the question is not “if”; the questions are “when” and “who”.

As Captain John Parker said at Lexington Common on April 19, 1775: “Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”

[First_Salute]

Paradox of Self-Amendment, Section 17 - Earlham.edu treatise by Peter Suber.

Includes discussion of The Bricker amendment:

... proposed by North Carolina 165 years earlier. When other states were demanding a Bill of Rights in the federal constitution, North Carolina demanded an amendment that would say

...nor shall any treaty be valid which is contradictory to the Constitution of the United States.