Treaties are not the law of the land regardless what the politicians may say. The rights of the people cannot be abrogated or changed by a treaty. The President cannot ban all firearms with the UN making the decrees of what is law or not. All treaties have to be in agreement with the Constitution and the bill of rights. But not to the Tyrants who seek to twist the Constitution.
Under Article 2 Sec. 2 clause 2 in the US Constitution states:
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.
The President with the advice and consent of the Senate seeking to sign the UN Small Arms treaty. The question is about the treaty is. Does is agree with the Constitution?
If you read in the Anti Federalist papers there was a concern about the Senate and the President with the power to make treaties. The writers seen the imbalance of power not having the House of Representatives involved in ratifying treaties. They have seen the possible flaw that can be a threat to all our freedoms expressing their concern in Anti Federalist number 75. Here is what the writer says:
I see nothing to hinder the president and senate, at a convenient crisis, to declare themselves hereditary and supreme, and the lower house altogether useless, and to abolish what shadow of the state constitutions remain by this power alone; and as the president and senate have all that influence which arises from the creating and appointing of all offices and officers, who can doubt but at a proper occasion they will succeed in such an attempt? And who can doubt but that men will arise who will attempt it? Will the doing so be a more flagrant breach of trust, or a greater degree of violence and perfidy, than has already been practiced in order to introduce the proposed plan?
Why Because the people’s house has no say in ratification of treaties that could be a threat to our republican form of government and our God Given Liberties. The author says the congress as a whole ratifying treaties is better on chamber and the President. The writer emphatically makes the point again in Anti Federalist 75 again saying:
Therefore, though the small house of representatives will consist of the natural aristocracy of the country, as well as the senate, yet not being dangerously combined with the executive branch, it has not such certain influential inducements to corruption.
Also the Writer of Anti Federalist 84 says about treaties saying:
This will appear the more necessary, when it is considered, that not only the Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof, but all treaties made, under the authority of the United States, are the supreme law of the land, and supersede the Constitutions of all the States. The power to make treaties, is vested in the president, by and with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the senate. I do not find any limitation or restriction to the exercise of this power. The most important article in any Constitution may therefore be repealed, even without a legislative act. Ought not a government, vested with such extensive and indefinite authority, to have been restricted by a declaration of rights? It certainly ought.
The writer has seen the potential for corruption with the Senate and the President in the treaty making process and seen the House of Representitives bringing balance of power to the process if Congress as a whole ratified treaties. This is the concern of all the anti Federalist writers of a centralized government seizing power over time. In Anti Federalist number 17 says so eloquently:
It is not meant, by stating this case, to insinuate that the Constitution would warrant a law of this kind! Or unnecessarily to alarm the fears of the people, by suggesting that the Federal legislature would be more likely to pass the limits assigned them by the Constitution, than that of an individual State, further than they are less responsible to the people. But what is meant is, that the legislature of the United States are vested with the great and uncontrollable powers of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts, and other general powers; and are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the State governments, and reduce this country to one single government.
The Writers expressed the concern that without a Bill of Rights, this Constitution has sown the seeds of tyranny as the Anti Federalist Paper #84 makes the point saying:
If we may collect the sentiments of the people of America, from their own most solemn declarations, they hold this truth as self-evident, that all men are by nature free. No one man, therefore, or any class of men, have a right, by the law of nature, or of God, to assume or exercise authority over their fellows. The origin of society, then, is to be sought, not in any natural right which one man has to exercise authority over another, but in the united consent of those who associate.
This is why the Bill of Rights was adopted and ratified as part of the Constitution to restrain government. As expressed in the Preamble to the Bill of Rights which declares:
The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.
President Obama who is ready to sign the UN Small Arms Treaty and the Law of the Sea treaty is close to being ratified with two thirds of the Senate concurring. These two treaties all are to the Contrary, not withstanding. The two treaties go against our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They are unconstitutional. They both bring in foreign influence which had the concern of many of the early founders in Anti Federalist Papers #3
The policies of the politicians in Washington with powers not delegated by the Constitution will eventually lead to another civil war by provocation or by design from foreign influence off shore controlling our elected representatives. If Obama comes after everyone’s firearms and to confiscate all private property to satisfy the bankers. This will start a conflict because of government overreach. When civil war happens Anti Federalist writer in article #7 sees into the future says:
Of all the plagues that infest a nation, a civil war is the worst. Famine is severe, pestilence is dreadful; but in these, though men die, they die in peace. The father expires without the guilt of the son; and the son, if he survives, enjoys the inheritance of his father. Cities may be thinned, but they neither plundered nor burnt. But when a civil war is kindled, there is then forth no security of property nor protection from any law. Life and fortune become precarious. And all that is dear to men is at the discretion of profligate soldiery, doubly licentious on such an occasion. Cities are exhausted by heavy contributions, or sacked because they cannot answer exorbitant demand.
In the next paragraph saying something very profound to me about the reality of a civil war we might face again because the flaws in the Constitution again in Anti Federalist Paper #7:
May Heaven avert the dreadful catastrophe! In the most limited governments, what wranglings, animosities, factions, p
artiality, and all other evils that tend to embroil a nation and weaken a state, are constantly practiced by legislators. What then may we expect if the new constitution be adopted as it now stands? The great will struggle for power, honor and wealth; the poor become a prey to avarice, insolence and oppression. And while some are studying to supplant their neighbors, and others striving to keep their stations, one villain will wink at the oppression of another, the people be fleeced, and the public business neglected. From despotism and tyranny good Lord deliver us.
The Bill of Rights did not stop the Authoritarians. They will use the commerce clause to attack economic liberty which now we call crony capitalism as foreseen in Anti Federalist Papers # 11:
The remaining power for peace and trade might perhaps be safely lodged with Congress under some limitations. Three restrictions appear to me to be essentially necessary to preserve that equality of rights to the states, which it is the object of the state governments to secure to each citizen. 1st. It ought not to be in the power of Congress, either by treaty or otherwise, to alienate part of any state without the consent of the legislature. 2nd. They ought not to be able, by treaty or other law, to give any legal preference to one part above another. 3rd. They ought to be restrained from creating any monopolies….
Now we have a President who is operating outside the Constitution. Ever since President Abraham Lincoln to today seeing the overreach of the chief executive usurping the power of congress and the states. In Federalist #74 writing foreseen the danger :
The writer of these essays has clearly proven, that the President is a King to all intents and purposes, and at the same time one of the most dangerous kind too – an elective King, the commander in chief of a standing army, etc. And to those add, that he has a negative power over the proceedings of both branches of the legislature. And to complete his uncontrolled sway, he is neither restrained nor assisted by a privy council, which is a novelty in government. I challenge the politicians of the whole continent to find in any period of history a monarch more absolute. . . .
The writers of the Anti Federalist Papers seen the tyranny coming to this land, The written extensively about the possible flaws in the Constitution. Will there be changes needed in the Constitution that need to be addressed?
Yes I agree, Some modifications are needed in the Constitution. Do not abolish the Bill of Rights.
Take away the power of Congress to abrogate their Constitutional duties and responsibilities to allow the Private Central Bank to control the currency. No more private Central banks.
With the changes in technology and the increased of mobility we have. There have to be some provisions that have to be modified.
The fact is the Anti Federalist writers seen the abuses a centralized government can bring to the several states. This is why they wanted a Bill of Rights to further restrain the power of government. Even with the Bill of Rights, the Federal government to this day still usurps the power of the states and the individual under the clause “being necessary and proper”
The anti Federalist predicted this tyranny over 200 years ago. The US Constitution is a great document, if followed and honored. We will get our freedom back and our prosperity. We can be a great nation again at peace with the world with no illegal wars.
The truth is there are people who will manipulate and twist the meaning of the Constitution from its original intent. The power of commerce clause is twisted to control economic and personal behavior to attack the Bill of Rights, to restrict the second amendment in our Bill of Rights. The meaning of the word “regulate” now and back in 1787 are now opposite as night and day. The meaning of the word “Regulate” in 1787 meant to keep free flowing and keep regular without restriction.
Today “Regulate” means to restrict or impede. They attack the right to keep and bear arms twisting the definition of a Well Regulated Militia to infringe on the second amendment. Also using the commerce clause to shut down as certain industry like industrial Hemp in favor of another industry like DuPont is making a synthetic rope instead of a rope made of Hemp.
Just remember our rights are God Given with Alienable rights which Blacks Law Dictionary defines as:
Incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred to another; not alienable.
No matter how much corruption has metastasized in our government. Our rights cannot be taken away by treaty or an act of congress. We can only lose them by giving them away or surrendering them by our own free will.
The Anti Federalist writers wrote these papers, so we can be aware when tyranny comes here to oppress us, we can act and take back our liberties by listening to the wisdom of the founders who use historical precedent and good moral judgement to back up what they say. Let their words not be ignored.