Commentaries, Global Warming, Opinions   Cover   •   Commentary   •   Books & Reviews   •   Climate Change   •   Site Links   •   Feedback
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32
WEBCommentary Editor
Author:  Bob Webster
Bio: Bob Webster
Date:  September 4, 2015
Print article - Printer friendly version

Email article link to friend(s) - Email a link to this article to friends

Facebook - Facebook

Topic category:  Corruption in Government

A Treaty By Any Other Name Is Still A Treaty
The Constitutionally Illegal Iran "Agreement" is, by definition, a "Treaty"

The Obama-Kerry Iran "executive agreement" cannot be enforced unless it receives Congressional approval as a formal treaty. There is no constitutional authority for a President to negotiate an "executive agreement" with foreign nations. If the Iran nuclear agreement is not formally voted upon and approved by the Senate as a "treaty", any expenditure of public funds in compliance with the agreement will be, by definition, illegal and all agents of the US Government associated with any such expenditure will be committing federal crimes subject to the most severe penalties.

Definition: Treaty - a formally concluded and ratified agreement between countries.

The United States Constitution is the Supreme Law of the United States. It takes precedence over and is superior to any action, law or regulation (federal, state, county or municipal) that attempts to subvert its provisions.

The Congress of the United States (House of Representatives and/or Senate) cannot alter, change, replace, or ignore provisions of the US Constitution. Only constitutionally-prescribed amendment procedures are legitimate means by which the US Constitution can be changed.

Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution defines the President's treaty-making power:  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;

In collaboration with a compliant Republican Senate, an arrangement proposed by Senator Robert Phillips "Bob" Corker, Jr. of Tennessee treats the Iran Nuclear Treaty as "an executive agreement", allowing Obama to claim it is not a treaty and, therefore, does not require a two-thirds vote to be adopted. That arrangement is unconstitutional and, therefore, has no force.

Other than the amendment process (in which the President plays no role whatsoever), neither the Senate nor the President has authority to alter the US Constitution. Consequently, the Senate's "agreement" to treat the Iran nuclear treaty as "an executive agreement" is invalid and cannot have the force of law!

Consequently, any vote on the Iran Nuclear Treaty must obtain approval of at least two-thirds of members present in order to be adopted, as provided in the US Constitution.

Any attempt by the President to enforce an agreement that has not been properly authorized under our Constitution is illegal and subject to criminal prosecution.

One wonders why the Republican Senate didn't simply arrange to reduce the number of Republicans present for the vote so that Democrats and a handful of Republican senators could have constitutionally obtained the necessary two-thirds majority, leaving no grounds to challenge this unconstitutional arrangement!

One can call an "apple" a "pear", but doing so does not make the "apple" a "pear".

Similarly, one can call a "treaty" an "executive agreement", but doing so does make the "treaty" an "executive agreement".

Such games are for children. They have no place in the highest offices of our federal government.

Finally, the US Constitution does not authorize the President to enter into "executive agreements" with foreign nations. The US Constitution only grants Presidential authority to negotiate treaties, which treaties must obtain a two-thirds majority approval of Senators present.

Whatever happened to ethical and honest government?

Bob Webster
WEBCommentary (Editor, Publisher)

Send email feedback to Bob Webster


Biography - Bob Webster

Bob Webster, a descendant of Daniel Webster's father and early American patriot, Ebenezer Webster, has always had a strong interest in early American history, our Constitution, U.S. politics, and law. Politically he is a constitutional republican with objectivist and libertarian roots. He has faith in the ultimate triumph of truth and reason over deception and emotion. He is a strong believer in our Constitution as written and views the abandonment of constitutional restraint by the regressive Progressive movement as a great danger to our Republic. His favorite novel is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and believes it should be required reading for every high school student so they can understand the dangers of tolerating the growth of unconstitutional crushingly powerful central government. He strongly believes, as our Constitution enshrines, that the interests of the individual should be held superior to the interests of the state.

A lifelong interest in meteorology and climatology spurred his strong interest in science. Bob earned his degree in Mathematics at Virginia Tech, graduating in 1964.


Read other commentaries by Bob Webster.

Visit Bob Webster's website at WEBCommentary

Copyright 2015 by Bob Webster
All Rights Reserved.

[ Back ]


© 2004-2017 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved