Treaties can’t trump the Constitution but corrupt politicians can

by Doug Book,  staff writer

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s expected signing of the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty has once again raised the question of whether the terms of a treaty can take precedence over—even nullify—the rights acknowledged and secured by the Constitution of the United States.

For decades, apostles of one world government have endeavored to convince the American people that treaties, rather than the Constitution, embody the supreme law of the land. In 1952, Secretary of State and Council on Foreign Relations member John Foster Dulles told the American Bar Association that “Treaty law can override the Constitution.” “Treaties for example…can cut across the rights given the people by their constitutional Bill of Rights.” (1)

But the Supreme Court has more than once decided against the propaganda of the new world order crowd. In the landmark case Reid v Covert, the Court ruled”…no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution.” In short, as “[the Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty,” the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land and treaties may neither supplant nor amend it. (2)  

However, treaty articles have been willfully applied in the U.S. regardless of constitutional requirements or Supreme Court decisions.  A century ago, Theodore Roosevelt signed and implemented the terms of a treaty “..for two years before the Senate acted.”  He later stated that he “…would have continued it until the end of [his] term, if necessary, without any action by Congress.” Roosevelt claimed, “the Constitution did not explicitly give me power to bring about the necessary agreement with Santo Domingo. But the Constitution did not forbid my doing what I did.”  (3)

Would a re-elected Obama follow Roosevelt’s example by pressing the Arms Trade Treaty on the American public? Certainly, the Eric Holder Department of Justice would have no compunction about enforcing this latest of Obama’s unconstitutional schemes to undermine the 2nd Amendment.  And how could the combined might and authority of the executive branch be prevented from exploiting the terms of this   document in a federal assault on the right to keep and bear arms?

The Reid Court wrote that “…an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution is void under domestic U.S. law, the same as any other federal law in conflict with the Constitution.” But if Barack Obama were willing to inflict the unconstitutional terms of a treaty on the American people, he would certainly be willing to ignore any Court ruling which sought to prevent it. (3)

Though Congress has the authority to nullify a treaty legislatively and federal courts the power to overturn any unconstitutional terms, the American public has learned that neither of these institutions can be trusted with the defense of the Constitution or the rights it secures. Should Barack Obama win re-election, it will be up to the people to defend their 2nd Amendment rights. And that could make for a very messy affair.

Follow Coach at @KcoachcCoach

To reach your Congressional representative, use this link:

To read more use these links:




To read more about how hypocritical the Democrats have been over the past 200 years. Get you copy of Coach’s new book Crooks Thugs and bigots: the lost hidden and changed history of the Democratic Party available at: 

In this world you may have knowledge or you may have repose, but you may not have both. 

What have you done today to deserve to live in America? If you want suggestions of what to do to fight for our freedom see the What each of us can do to defeat Obama page at the top of the CiR homepage. 

Comments on this or any other essay can be sent by following the posting instructions below

Be Sociable, Share!

5 thoughts on “Treaties can’t trump the Constitution but corrupt politicians can”

  1. ““the Constitution did not explicitly give me power to bring about the necessary agreement with Santo Domingo. But the Constitution did not forbid my doing what I did.”

    Our first “progressive”. He should have acquainted himself with the debates over the bill of rights. The constitution DOES tell the president everything he is entitled to do, it would be impossible to list all the things he can’t do.

    If Romney wins, will he just decide not to enforce Obamacare, or any other laws with which he doesn’t agree?

  2. Doug, I’m wondering if we’re dealing with a “that was THEN…this is NOW” sort of scenario…
    Bravo Sierra which would have NEVER passed muster as law years ago, is now de rigeur in both the House and Senate.
    Most all our law-makers now thumb their noses at, and spit upon the Constitution, because it is an impediment to their power…….the Constitution is like the Truth……so limiting !!
    While I acknowledge….and am very glad to know that there ARE such precedents in Case Law under which any Obama/Hillary/NGO/Senate action would be challenged…we are also dealing with an extremely activist, schitzoid, and fractured U.S. Supreme Court which cannot now be relied upon to follow the Constitutional mandates any more than does Congress or O’Liar.
    Even as we speak, our own LOUSY Senate has an anti-gun owner Bill attached as a rider to another important primary Bill upon which they will be voting next week…
    It is up to the voters to remove those Congressional types who are constantly skirting and dancing around the Constitution….I have two Alaska Senators and One Congressman-at-Large already in my sights for their ridiculous positions on L.O.S.T. (Law of the Sea U.N.sovereignty bombshell).
    No wonder thinking folks SO HATE the mafia-congress with which we’re now saddled….they make the rules up as they go along, and precious little of it is Constitutional in nature.

  3. Joanne,

    Where in the Constitution is there mention of the EPA? The Dept of Education? The list is endless! Good Lord, the Constitution had to be amended especially for the IRS!

    Congress and Presidents have prostituted the Constitution for many, many decades, all for the purpose of undermining our liberty and increasing their power. Today its just a document used when it can somehow support the particular position of one of the DC ruling class. In other words–very infrequently!

  4. Thanks to those of you who took the time to go to Dick Morris’ petition site to sign the petition to “Stop the U.S. From Signing the Arms Trade Treaty”.
    Just from Morris’ site alone, over 700,000 signatures were sent to Senators and Representatives ! That’s impressive.
    For now, the administration is backing off the issue…but look for it to raise its’ ugly head again, especially if Obama is re-elected.
    A whole slew of Senators wrote Hillary Clinton a letter asking her not to sign the Treaty… if those SAME Senators will pull their support for the anti-gun legislation which they have attached as a rider to another Bill currently working its’ way through the Senate, we can then believe that we have accomplished much.
    Dick Morris’ petition is still very much alive despite the temporary win; he wants it kept in place for those still wanting to sign on… so if you have not yet signed it, please go to :
    Look for the Petition to Stop the U.S. From signing the Arms Trade Treaty..
    Good Job everyone…and again, THANKS !

Comments are closed.