We proceed by telling our congresscritters to follow the Constitution and treat these treaties as treaties and put them before the Senate for a 2/3 approval.
In the framers vision of our republic who makes the call on constitutionality?
Ultimately you as a member of that special group of people called WE THE PEOPLE get to determine the constitutionality of laws. The Framers never intended that the Supreme Court would have the final say on these matters but that power was usurped in Marbury v. Madison. What we need to preserve the Constitution is a moral people and honest representatives. Right now we have neither.
Having said that, do you think calling a treaty a Trade Agreement in order to avoid the 2/3 Senate approval process is either moral or honest?
I certainly don't.
See #128
There are actually 5 branches of government mentioned in the Constitution.
We the People
States
Congress
President
Scotus
We the PEOPLE of the united STATES are the premier two, first mentioned branches.
To drive that point home, the Constitution reminds at the end that any power not mentioned belongs to the PEOPLE or to the STATES.
Interestingly, the PEOPLE are always first.
but that power was usurped in Marbury v. Madison.
Actually, modern lawyers arrive at that conclusion based on the complete twisting of one single sentence in Marbury. But there are paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs in the decision that say the exact opposite. The bottom line and summing up of Marbury vs. Madison is that the Court has to follow the Constitution, no matter what anyone else in any other branch may or may not do, and so do the other branches. Period.
By We the People do you mean congress? Or are you arguing for a national popular vote referendum on these issues?
Frankly, neither of those options sound like what the framers had in mind.