Steyr Club Forums banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
Just curious, where did you read that the US Constitution can be superceded by international treaty?

My understanding of the Constitution is that it can't be superceded; only amended or ignored.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
From here.

Art. VI; clause 2;

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

During the Constitution's ratification debates, Federalists argued Article VI's dangerous potential was guarded against through a treaty's two-step process of ratification: the power to make treaties was given solely to the President, but could only be enacted lawfully if 2/3 of the Senate assented to it. The assumption being that a super-majority of the Senate would guard against encroachments to liberty within any treaty.

So, basically, if Obama enters into a treaty contrary to our Constitutional rights, the only other backstop to it becoming law (thereby superceding Constitutional law) is a super-majority in the Senate.


Bittrich
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
The way I interpret that, it's saying that the constitution, laws passed by congress and treaties made by congress will be binding on state judges, despite what state constitutions and sate laws say.

An unconstitutional treaty cannot, in theory, become law, as an unconstitutional law cannot, in theory, exist.

I could be all jacked up, as I'm not a constitutional lawyer.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
The way I interpret that, it's saying that the constitution, laws passed by congress and treaties made by congress will be binding on state judges, despite what state constitutions and sate laws say.

An unconstitutional treaty cannot, in theory, become law, as an unconstitutional law cannot, in theory, exist.

I could be all jacked up, as I'm not a constitutional lawyer.


I think we are going to agree to disagree on the interpretation. But hey, I'm no Constitutional scholar either. :)


Bittrich
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,191 Posts
Bittrich is right on the money in this case....
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top