Re: Treaty law and 2A mechanics

[Dave Hardy]

There is an early 20th century case on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, I believe Missouri v. Holland, which essentially held that a treaty could expand Federal power (in that case, to regulate migratory bird takings, which were hardly within the commerce clause as it was understood at the time. The treaty power wouldn't trump the later Bill of Rights, but it would allow Congress (and prob. the Executive) to have broader powers than they otherwise would have.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Joseph E. Olson"
Sent: Jul 8, 2011 10:06 AM
To: Guy Smith , firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Treaty law and 2A mechanics

There is a US Supreme Court case from the 1950's that says that the Bill of Rights trumps ALL of the original Constitution, including the treaty clause.  I think it is Reid v. Covert.  It's about a military wife killing her GI husband in Germany.  Under the Status of Forces treaty, she was tried by Courts-Martial not in a civilian US District Court.  S. Ct. reversed.

 

*****************************************************************************************

Professor Joseph Olson, J.D., LL.M.                                   o-   651-523-2142 
Hamline University School of Law (MS-D2037)                    f-    651-523-2236
St. Paul, MN  55113-1235                                                 c-   612-865-7956
jol...@gw.hamline.edu                     http://law.hamline.edu/constitutional_law/joseph_olson.html                   

>>> "Guy Smith" <g...@gunfacts.info> 7/8/2011 11:46 AM >>>

Since treaty law is not even close to being my expertise, I’ll lean on the knowledge of this forum.

 

What are the anticipated mechanics and probable rulings if either CIFTA or the U.N. Arms Treaty were ratified? Some folks (including members of Obama’s camp) claim that treaty law has a disabling affect on legislation, and some are as bold as to suggest it can legally create regulatory control of enumerated rights (I fail to find any worthy support for that last one).

 

My reading of CIFTA leads me to believe that it would vest the Executive with a broad range of gun control obligations. In the absence of judicial rulings otherwise, executive decisions on how to implement the treaty would stand. If ratified (unlikely, but possible) it seems this would create a never-ending series of legal challenges … enough to keep Alan Gura gainfully employed well into his dotage.

 

Guy Smith

Shooting The Bull and Gun Facts

 

 

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.