Were the Constitution being respected by the current administration, the states would have exclusive jurisdiction over nearly all domestic issues. However, the states have transferred this precious right to Congress when they enter into a treaty that controls a domestic issue.
For instance, if we ratify a treaty on education, authority is immediately transferred to Congress. It should be imperative for Americans to realize we need limitations in deciding how we comply with the standards of international law.
Congress should never be free to decide whether international law controls our citizens.
This mistake could be neutralized with an amendment proposal at a hastily convened Convention of States. It would divide treaties into truly international issues and treaties which with domestic jurisdiction involved.
Under such an amendment, if the liberal President presently occupying the office, ratifies what is a real international treaty, then two-thirds majority of the Senate present and voting must approve.
The operative word in the last sentence is “present.” No wobbling because of re-election concerns.
But, and this is a big but, the treaty is aimed at our sovereign domestic policy, it must be ratified by a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress and by a two-thirds majority of both houses of three-fourths of the several states, period.
Obviously this is essentially an impossible standard to expect.
Why pass such a law? Because the Courts are much more to rule in favor of the two classes of passage whereby both could be ratified. If we just ban one type of treaty, we might see more leeway being given on the definition of the treaty types.
We are Americans, not the United Nations and this is our country.
* If you have enjoyed this column, may I suggest you scroll down this page and press the SUBSCRIBE box? It's FREE. Thank you for your patronage.
** Send your comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org