24 votes

USA vs. Bond: A Potential Disaster Brewing In Scotus.

USA VS. Bond.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-1227.pdf

This case is currently on the docket, and if the State, Holders DOJ wins, a dangerous precedent will have been set that establishing that international treaties trump the constitution.

With an obvious crossover to the recent small arms treaty signed without congressional approval, by Obama/ Kerry, one can see how this case ( Vs. Bond ) is the vehicle being constructed to carry away the second amendment, visa vie the UN small arms treaty being viewed as trumping the constitution.

I'm not a barrister, most likely this is obvious; but intuitive logic and past behaviors show that this back door method of nullification of our rights is a tried and true method for the Globalists.

I'm interested in getting several answers/ thoughts in response to this post.

A.) do you think my synopsis is correct

B.) if true, then what scenarios.

Thanks.
Stēkō Parrēsia




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

the ability to analyze and think things through..

We are not losing it because of dark conspiracies [bilderberg, tri-lateral commission], we are losing our country because we have abandoned the faith of our fathers...the ability to analyze and think things through.

The Original Intent of the Constitution:

Fast forward to 00:31:00

2014 Liberty Candidate Thread: http://www.dailypaul.com/287246/2014-liberty-candidate-thread

2016 Potential Presidential Candidates: http://alturl.com/mt7tq

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

This SHOULD be easy. Since

This SHOULD be easy. Since it's clearly stated that the Senate must ratify treaties by 2/3. But we clearly don't have a President that respects the Constitution, so sadly not a surprise.

Diamond Dog's picture

Based on SCOTUS ruling on Obamacare...

This could be trouble.

And no one will raise a fuss but Ted Cruz, and then everyone will stone him as a radical.

The Diamond Dog is a real cool cat. | Reporting on the world from an altitude of 420.

Supreme traitors

Abolish lifetime tenure : vote to retain or fire every judge every year

HINT: Most judges in America are traitors

The fact that "someone" has

The fact that "someone" has signed a treaty in counter position of the Constitution should make it null and void. By what authority did the signer enter into such a treaty. Is there not enforceable laws or rules which govern such anti-American activities?

Enumerated powers

This is the checks and balances set in place, however it is plain as my nose that this continuation of a Octavian Republic ( covert Fascist State ) has long ago abandoned any real pretense of maintaining the appearance of checks and balances within the restraints of the eneumarted powers.
The true underlying question, that transcends all threads here yet binds them altogether in a singularity is simply this:

When, and what shall America do about them to restore the Federal Government to it's enumerate powers and correct place in our society !

Stēkō Parrēsia

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

Even the UN CHARTER says that

Even the UN CHARTER says that national constitutions trump international treaties. It would be such a farce if they voted in favor of treaty trumping the Constitution. I'm 99% sure that this is essentially dead on arrival.

Yes, dangerous precedent.

The administrative branch legislates through mandates of its agencies - whose czars are not representatives of the people, that is, not elected, nor vetted and approved by Congress; the judicial branch legislates through its rulings.

I didn't mean to imply that the legislative branch does represent the will of the people. Not with so many legislators beholden to corporations and lobbies funding campaigns or providing other perks! I meant to just say that, although the administrative and judicial branches are not supposed to legislate (but rather serve as *checks* on the legislative branch)... they do.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

I would refer you back to the

I would refer you back to the U.S. constitution.
Is it the supreme law of the U.S.?
Does it describe the process for amending itself?
I try to never allow the media or government to make simple issues complicated.
Do not accept "yea but".
Remember, what the law says does NOT always matter when nudge comes to shove.
Progressives are taught to know that sometimes they can just force things through because conservatives loathe making a public fuss and tend to fully respect the authority of those in power.
Progressive motto: "just do it".
Libertarians always test man made laws by first looking at whether or not they violate natural law, and then by whether or not they violate the constitution.
So yes, your synopsis is correct. Our government will use this vehicle to cart away the second amendment as long as nobody stops them. Just remember that the government is becoming increasingly force-full with new laws and regulations and stopping them is becoming increasingly difficult if not impossible.
The scenarios are endless, but in the end welfare rats will simply rise up and demand full government control of everything in exchange for copious quantities of free cheese. It's simple arithmetic - once the porch monkeys outnumber the producers...game over.

Oh I as a libertarian

Shall go Marbury Vs. Maddison on any decision that countermand the constitution and am fully aware that NOTHING trumps it within our Nation borders.
Sadly, we are few and far between, gladly more are awakening daily, perhaps soon enough to effect proactive remedy: what remains is yet unseen for a short time.

My observation is that this is but a backdrop to an overt removal of our 2nd. Amendment rights. Mind you I do not own any weapons, saving my body and my mind. My reasoning for not owning them is my relationship with God through Jesus, I am personally NOT to own them so I do not. But I will use my VOICE and PEN to protect my, and your right to own them.

I've studied at length the likely end game of socialist progressivism and their propensity towards Fabian/ Fascist rule, it's not a very bright nor pretty picture no matter which route it may end.
I admonish " Stateist Conservatives ", non libertarians that to " compromise" with a progressive is not to strengthen nor achieve your own position, it is only to concede freedom(s) from yourself into the control of the progressive. There IS NO compromise with a person of a progressive ideological mindset that is good for freedom and individuality.

Stēkō Parrēsia

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

Marbury vs.

Madison is a case that needs shared with those who do not know, imo.
Reid vs. Covert has already established that the Constitution supersedes international treaties--this too, imo, should be mentioned frequently.

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond
BAN ELECTRONIC VOTING!!

Reid VS Covert

Thanks, I'll remember it now ! I knew that there had been a decision but my google search techniques need work I guess.

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

Missouri v. Holland

the 1920 case that effectively held that the so-called Supremacy Clause
trumps the 10th Amendment seems to be the real problem. The Supremes'
original decision in the Bond Case doesn't seem all that bad, considering.

Worrisome what they might do now that it has come back again, though...

Federalism

Yes, you are on point. It looks like the Court will have to decide if a treaty law “trumps” the 10th amendment. Here’s an article from last year after the appellate court ruled that the case comes under treaty law.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/2012/05/carol-anne-b...

Based upon the ruling in the first case where the court said, I think she should prevail.

“In this case, however, where the litigant is a party to an otherwise justiciable case or controversy, she is not forbidden to object that her injury results from disregard of the federal structure of our Government.”

http://www.powerpolitics.com
“If Americans wish to be free of judicial tyranny, they must at least develop basic knowledge of the judicial role in our republican government. The present state of affairs is a direct result of our collective ignorance.”

Nothing

Trumps the constitution. I don't give a fock what sort of nonsense they come up with!

My thoughts exactly.

Even while staring at the gaping barrel of their gun pointed at my face.
It is exactly this that I foresee soon coming upon us, in a very real sense I am warning of it.

Stēkō Parrēsia

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington