Court Rejects Lawmakers' Challenge to ABM Withdrawal

AP ^ | 12/30/02 | The Associated Press

[Jean S]

WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by 32 lawmakers who wanted to stop President Bush's withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

The plaintiffs had contended the withdrawal, which took effect in June, was unconstitutional because President Bush had not sought Congress' approval.

U.S. District Judge John Bates ruled Monday that the lawmakers lacked standing to bring the case, and the withdrawal from the treaty was a political matter, not judicial.

The ABM Treaty was a vital arms control agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union. Bush claimed it became outdated after the Cold War, and the United States needed to develop missile defenses to protect itself from attacks by small countries with missiles and animosity toward the United States.

Bates said lawmakers could have tried political action to prevent Bush from withdrawing from the treaty. For example, they could have sought to deny money for anti-ballistic missile systems.

"The fact that plaintiffs have several political arrows in their legislative quiver underscores the reluctance of the courts needlessly to involve themselves in interbranch disputes," Bates said.

He also noted the lawmakers were not authorized by the House or any committee to bring the lawsuit, and lawmakers were unable to win support for a resolution to urge Bush to consult with Congress on the withdrawal.

"Permitting individual congressmen to run to federal court any time they are on the losing end of some vote or issue would circumvent and undermine the legislative process," he said.

AP-ES-12-30-02 1817EST

[Poohbah]

Not only that, but, in my recollection, the ABM treaty was never ratified by the U.S.Senate in the first place .

Your recollection is false. The ABM Treaty was ratified in 1972 along with the SALT I treaty. SALT II was never ratified.

[gaspar]

Of the first nine names I noted eight were Democrats and members of both the Progressive (i.e., Marxist) Caucus and Democratic Socialists of America (Marxist). The only questionable person was Oberstar.

[Senator Pardek]

...otherwise territorial cessions WOULD turn into these sorts of nasty international legal messes.

I disagree. The 1967 Alaska Treaty no longer exists. Czarist Russia must reform, invalidate the treaty, and invade.

I would not label that under "international legal mess" but "quite ludicrous and causing no problems".

[Senator Pardek]

1867 - duh.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Your list sorted by last name:

Tammy Baldwin , D-2-WI
John Conyers , D-14-MI
Peter DeFazio , D-4-OR
Lane Evans , D-17-IL
Sam Farr , D-17-CA
Bob Filner , D-50-CA
Alcee Hasting , D-23-FL
Earl Hilliard , D-7-AL
Maurice Hinchey , D-26-NY
Jesse Jackson , Jr., D-2-IL
Sheila Jackson-Lee , D-18-TX.
Marcy Kaptur , D-9-OH
Carolyn Kilpatrick , D-15-MI
Dennis Kucinich , D-10-Ohio
William Lacy Clay , D-1-MO
Barbara Lee , D-9-CA
Jim McDermott , D-7-WA
Cynthia McKinney , D-4-GA
Gregory Meeks , D-6-NY
George Miller , D-7-CA
Patsy Mink , D-2-HI
Jerrold Nadler , D-8-NY
James Oberstar , D-8-MN
John Olver , D-1-MA
Bernard Sanders , I-1-VT
Janice Schakowsky , D-9-IL
Hilda Solis , D-31-CA
Fortney (Pete) Stark , D-13-CA
Edolphus Towns , D-10-NY
Stephanie Tubbs Jones , D-11-OH
Maxine Waters , D-35-CA
Lynn Woolsey , D-6-CA

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Your list, sorted by State Abbreviation:

Earl Hilliard , D-7-AL
Sam Farr , D-17-CA
Bob Filner , D-50-CA
Barbara Lee , D-9-CA
George Miller , D-7-CA
Hilda Solis , D-31-CA
Fortney (Pete) Stark , D-13-CA
Maxine Waters , D-35-CA
Lynn Woolsey , D-6-CA
Alcee Hasting , D-23-FL
Cynthia McKinney , D-4-GA
Patsy Mink , D-2-HI
Lane Evans , D-17-IL
Jesse Jackson , Jr., D-2-IL
Janice Schakowsky , D-9-IL
John Olver , D-1-MA
John Conyers , D-14-MI
Carolyn Kilpatrick , D-15-MI
James Oberstar , D-8-MN
William Lacy Clay , D-1-MO
Maurice Hinchey , D-26-NY
Gregory Meeks , D-6-NY
Jerrold Nadler , D-8-NY
Edolphus Towns , D-10-NY
Dennis Kucinich , D-10-OH
Marcy Kaptur , D-9-OH
Stephanie Tubbs Jones , D-11-OH
Peter DeFazio , D-4-OR
Bernard Sanders , I-1-VT
Jim McDermott , D-7-WA
Tammy Baldwin , D-2-WI
Sheila Jackson-Lee , D-18-TX.

For the record, note there are three times as many reps from OH and IL as MA.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by 32 lawmakers who wanted to stop President Bush's withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

It's already done, so this is nothing more than a tactic to make some noise. I'd like to find out who these 32 chuckleheads are so that I can call their offices and tell them that they suck.

[Poohbah]

The ABM treaty has nothing to do with ownership of property. It had to do with actions to try and limit nuclear weapons and their delivery systems with a country that we were in a cold War with. That country no longer exists, therefore the treaty does not abide re our actions now. The Cold War is over!

Fine. Other treaties not pertaining to transfer of property that the USSR was a party to remained in force--for example, there were various treaties pertaining to extradition of criminals, conduct of business affairs, Russia's membership in the United Nations and its seat on the Security Council...all of these remained in force. Generally, treaties made with sovereign nations remain in force unless they are explicitly renounced, even if there is a radical change of government.

Whether or not a specific treaty SHOULD remain in force is a far different issue than whether it does. Russia acted as the successor national entity to the USSR, and announced that they would continue to abide by the ABM Treaty. At the time, we agreed to do so. The treaty therefore remained in force. If we later decided to withdraw from the treaty (as we did), that is a separate matter.

The Heritage Foundation argument was a very weak one--it was, in essence, the reverse side of this particular lawsuit. The only reason it was advanced was that we conservatives controlled the Senate and the House, but not the Executive, and we were trying to slow-roll the Clinton Administration on National Missile Defense. It was an attempt to turn a political argument into a legal one, just like this bout of Democrat stupidity attempted to do.

In the end, it was a thoroughly useless argument. We simply terminated our participation in the treaty, as provided by international law and the terms of the ABM Treaty itself.

[Poohbah]

OK, maybe that's a bad example.

Was Russia required to formally ratify the United Nations Treaty?

Was Russia required to ratify the Chicago and Warsaw Conventions regarding international civil aviation?

Or was Russia's announcement that they would continue to observe all treaties ratified by the USSR sufficient?

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

No joke, the USSR isn't even a real country anymore. Is a treaty with the African country of Rhodesia still in force? Of course not, the country is now Zimbabwe and is under a totally different government!

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Barbara Lee, there's a big frickin' surprise.

[The Citizen Soldier]

U.S. District Judge John Bates ruled Monday that the lawmakers lacked standing to bring the case, and the withdrawal from the treaty was a political matter, not judicial.

Sweet music to my ears! This same ruling should be applied on a daily basis. We need to replace the liberal "activist" judges have legislated from the bench for far too long.

C'mon Judicial Committee, let's see a parade of those W appointments coming forward!

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

The lack of MA representation got me. "Red" John Oliver is a gimme, he represents Amherst and the Berkshires, which might as well be P'yongyang.

[Spacetrucker]

I would presume that Jihad Jim McDermott would be the bigger
anti-climax, wouldn't you?

[The Citizen Soldier]

note there are three times as many reps from OH and IL as MA.

Boy, California is certainly well represented in this list of Who's Who on the left! One question -- where's Nancy Pelosi?

I can only conclude that as Minority Leader she fully supports the President's decision. Yea, right.

[Spacetrucker]

"Well, IIRC, none of these people was a Senator. The House has no role in approving treaties." ..................................... I am somewhat confused. Has there been a comingling of two branches of government while I was sleeping today?

[goldstategop]

The treaty is now a non-issue. Even the Democrats have moved on. If the Russians aren't complaining about it, our Left can hardly be softer on national defense than Moscow.

[Poohbah]

I was stating the facts. These people were all members of the House. They had no role in approving treaties.

Had this been the United States Senate, as a body, raising the question with the courts...well, it would be very interesting indeed. However, they didn't. Silence equals consent.