View Single Post
Old 08-15-2009, 01:41 PM  
ottyhotties
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrisH View Post
I even UNDERLINED the source, and yet you are unable to find it?

Article 17 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Its an agreement under international law the the US have signed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...tical_Righ ts

The Senate ratified with reservations, understandings, and declarations. They ratified it in a way that prevented these said rights found in the covenant and left no rights to them in US courts.

http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/...4.01-5014.html

See Buell, 274 F.3d at 372. "`Courts in the United States are bound to give effect to international law and to international agreements, except that a `non-self-executing' agreement will not be given effect as law in the absence of necessary authority.'" Id. (quoting Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law § 111 (1987)). When the Senate ratified the ICCPR, it specifically declared that the provisions thereof were "not self-executing." 138 Cong. Rec. S4784. And, since that time, Congress has never "enacted implementing legislation for" the ICCPR. Buell, 274 F.3d at 372; see Beazley, 242 F.3d at 267-68 (citing cases and other sources indicating that the ICCPR is not self-executing).

Btw, most if any agreements the USA makes are not self executing. There is absolutely no way in our system of government you can get 2/3 of Senators to give away American sovereignty, which in other words is their own power away to international bodies. The next time you watch a vote on C-Span about an international agreement watch the vote prior to it because that will be the vote that strips everything out.
ottyhotties is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote