Found this on Facebook……if Obama tries this it could be a big mistake on his part. Most Americans are not going to let the 2nd amendment be banned under any reason, especially the UN. Of course Obama already has a track record of bypassing the Constitution, whether it’s legal or not.
by Julia Sieben on Thursday, July 19, 2012 at 1:04pm ·

A word of warning….. Obama and Clinton can go a round about way to force the Small Arms Treaty into effect “de facto”, without going through Senate approval, this has been done in the past 2 times by previous Presidents.

A treaty is a formal agreement with another nation. The Constitution gives the president the power to make treaties “provided two-thirds of the senators present concur [agree].” When the president signs a treaty, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee studies it before submitting it to the entire Senate for a vote. Presidents starting with George Washington (1732799; served 17897) have involved the Senate in the process of negotiating treaties. This way a treaty has a greater likelihood of being approved by the Senate.

 

The Senate usually approves treaties signed by the president. One of the most famous exceptions was the Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War I (19148). The Treaty of Versailles created the League of Nations, an international organization that was the forerunner of the United Nations. President Woodrow Wilson (1856924; served 19131) negotiated this important treaty without Senate involvement, and the Senate refused to approve it.

The House plays no role in the process of negotiating and approving treaties. If a treaty program requires federal money, however, the House can determine whether the program gets money through its role in passing appropriations bills.

The Constitution does not say who has the power to cancel treaties. (But is does say who can ratify them and it isn’t the President!)  According to Louis Fisher in The Politics of Shared Power, treaties have been cancelled by congressional laws, Senate resolutions, new treaties, and presidential action. The Supreme Court has not resolved the issue. Generally speaking, the Supreme Court prefers to have Congress and the president work together to determine who has the power to cancel

In addition to treaties, presidents often sign executive agreements with the heads of other nations. Executive agreements are not officially treaties, so they do not require the consent of the Senate. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, has ruled that executive agreements are part of the supreme law of the land, just like treaties.

Presidents typically use treaties for the most important issues and executive agreements for less important issues. Sometimes, however, presidents use an executive agreement for an important issue. Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman (1884972; served 19453), for example, used executive agreements at meetings in Yalta and Potsdam to end World War II (19395). Using an executive agreement instead of a treaty is significant, because the Senate can require a president to change a treaty before the Senate will approve it

 

About these ads