Obama Defies Supreme Court, Constitution To Sign Paris Treaty

Reuters reports:

The United States will sign the Paris Agreement on climate change this year regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision to put a chunk of President Barack Obama’s environmental action on hold, the U.S. climate envoy said on Tuesday.

PROBLEM…. Obama signing a treaty does NOT equate to “The United States” signing a treaty. As a matter of fact, it’s not even close.

Obama signing a treaty doesn’t make it binding upon the people of the United States.

First, a treaty is not even considered the Supreme Law of the Land UNLESS it is approved by 2/3 of the Senate.

Second, a treaty is not the Supreme Law of the Land, even if it is approved by 2/3 of the Senate, if it is not consistent with the Constitution. Read Article 6, section 2 of the Constitution:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Treaties are only valid if they are made “under the authority of the United States.” That means that unless the treaty involves a power that is specifically delegated to the federal government, it is NOT a valid treaty. Listen to Thomas Jefferson:

By the general power to make treaties, the constitution must have intended to comprehend only those subjects which are usually regulated by treaty, and cannot be otherwise regulated… It must have meant to except out of these the rights reserved to the states; for surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.

Since there is no specific delegation in the Constitution for the federal government to have power over the environment, that power is reserved to the States, consistent with the 10th Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

With these facts in mind, even if the president signs the Paris Treaty, and even if the Senate approves, the treaty is NOT binding on the people or the States because it is a violation of the Constitution and the powers reserved to the States.

The States and the People must say, “We Will Not Comply!”

After Teaching About The Constitution, Here’s What A Congressman’s Aide Said To Me…

I recently taught a lesson on the “Constitutional Duty of the State and Local Legislators” in West Virginia. In the spirit of education, I wanted to share a portion of a conversation I had with an Aide from Rep. Alex Mooney’s office. (My humble apologies to the Aide, as I do not remember his name. I am sure he remembers this event, so if he would like me to update the article with his name, I will be more than happy to do so.)

Aide: “I really enjoyed your teaching. I just call exception to one thing. The purist attitude you teach is exactly why we cannot get anything done in Washington.”

Me: “I call exception to your application of the word purist. Setting aside principle for compromise is not ‘getting something done.’ Compromising principle is the very definition of immorality. I will never give anyone a pass or permission to be immoral.”

Let us look at this Aide’s statement from a logical, critical thinking perspective…

When I teach, I teach based upon history, fact, and law and the principles established by these factors. I do not teach based upon theory or opinion. History is history, not changed by opinion. An event either happened or it did not. Fact is fact, not subject to opinion. It is either true or not. The law is the law, also not subject to opinion. It is either the Supreme Law of the Land or it is not. History, Fact, and law are not subject to compromise. If you compromise them, you change the very nature of what they are; History becomes theory, Fact becomes opinion, and Law becomes suggestion.

The Constitution is not created upon theory, opinion, or suggestion. It is created based upon History, Fact, and Law. It is a document of time-tested, blood-learned Principles. By the very definition of Principle, it cannot change; it cannot be compromised as it is foundational. If you can change a principle, it is not really a principle, but a mutable guideline. The Supreme Law of the Land is NOT a mutable guideline, subject to compromise. To make such a compromise would be to transmute the very nature of the established American Constitutional Republic.

So when your Congressman calls you a purist for demanding compliance with the Constitution, the founding Principles and Supreme Law of the land, he is suggesting that you should give him permission to act contrary to Principle, Truth, and Law.

What are their antonyms?

Principle: Immorality

Truth: Lie

Law: Unlawful

Therefore, your Congressman wants you to allow him to compromise the Constitution, and is asking you for permission and expects you to give him a pass to act immorally, based upon a lie, and in an unlawful manner. Remember, we elect people to represent us. Are we really represented by immorality, lies, and lawlessness? Is that who we are as a people?

Additionally, when a government and its laws are based upon immorality, lies, and lawlessness, it is not a just government.

I am not asserting that a Congressman cannot engage in compromise. I am proving that there are some things that are not subject to compromise, and the Constitution is one of those things.

I will say it again: I will never give anyone permission to act immorally, based upon lie, and in an unlawful manner. So don’t even ask. I am not a “purist” by its derogatory application. I am a person who endeavors to behave in a moral, truthful and lawful manner. I expect nothing less from the one I have elected to represent me.

Are We Slaves?

In his 1772 essay, The Rights of Colonists, Samuel Adams explains the condition of the Natural Rights of the colonists. I ask you to consider this thought; If the colonists, subjects to the Kingdom of Great Britain, possessed these Rights, shouldn’t freemen in a Constitutional Republic also possess them … even more so?

“Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.”

You have a Right to Life. If you do not have a Right to Life then all you have is a privilege by permission. If you have to ask permission to have Life … you are dead.

You have a Right to Liberty. If you do not have a Right to Liberty then all you have is a privilege by permission. If you have to ask permission to have Liberty … you are a subject.

You have a Right to secure Property. Property, to our framers, was much broader than the land you house sits upon. Property is life, liberty, land, money, wages, produce of your labor, etc. If you do not have a Right to secure Property then all you have is a privilege by permission. If you have to ask permission to secure Property … you are an indentured servant.

“In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.”

“That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where arbitrary restrictions, exemptions, and monopolies deny to part of its citizens that free use of their faculties, and free choice of their occupations…” said James Madison in his 1792 work, Property.

You have a Right to defend your Life, Liberty, and Property. If you do not have a Right to defend your Life, Liberty, or Property, then all you have is a privilege by permission. If you have to ask permission to defend your Rights … you are a slave.

Being a slave is worse than being dead. Winston Churchill said this:

If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds are against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves.

Take back the narrative. Stop letting the government and media talk about 1st Amendment or 2nd Amendment Rights. Your Rights do not come from the Constitution. Your Constitution is based upon your Rights. If the Constitution caught on fire tomorrow, you will still have Rights. If the government goes crazy and rewrites the Constitution or ignores the Constitution … you still have Rights.

Take back the Truth! Do not be pulled into an emotional illogical argument. Speak the facts, openly and boldly. Your Rights do not exist conditioned upon someone’s feeling or desire for safety. Your Rights exist based upon your creation.

“We hold these Truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”

Why do we continue to act as if government has the authority to tell us when and how to exercise our Rights?

Why do we continue to allow government to dictate the conditions of our Rights?

Are we dead? Are we subjects? Are we indentured servants? Are we slaves? It is a matter of choice. How will you choose?

What’s Really Going On In Oregon?

Too often, the narrative is dictated to us by the media and government. I created this video to put truth back into the discussion about the Oregon Standoff. This short video will tell you exactly what is going on in Oregon and all throughout the Western States. It will explain the real problems and real solutions. In less than 9 minutes, you will be educated enough to shut down the ignorance!

Take back the narrative. Reclaim the Truth.

In Paris Massacre’s Aftermath, Here’s One Important Truth We Must Apply From History

As we pray for the people of France today, can we learn some very important lessons from the past?

When the Twin Towers fell, we made a very serious mistake. We believed we could trade our Liberty for security and allowed our government, with our permission, to “temporarily” impose upon our Rights in an effort to keep us safe.  

Let’s be very clear of two things: it was NEVER temporary, and we are NO safer now than we were then. We have just lost very precious Liberties, and dangerously expanded the power of government.

You will undoubtedly hear, over the next few days, people claiming the need for MORE government power of surveillance and the need for MORE government power to keep us safe. Make no mistake; whenever government gets more power, the people have less Liberty.

When we hear these “desperate” cries for power, in the face of a fearful and vulnerable generation, we must remember the words of William Pitt, the younger:

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

These cries of necessity, Pitt is explaining, classify people in their own human nature. Those who want the power as tyrants, and those whose fear will turn them to slaves. Who do we want to be?

I believe John Milton would punctuate Pitt’s statement with this:

“And with necessity, The tyrant’s plea, excus’d his devilish deeds” (Paradise Lost)

These tyrants will NOT let a crisis go to waste. They will frame the narrative such that if you care about civil liberties, then you don’t care about national securities. They admit you can’t both keep their oath and fight terrorism. So they take the oath disingenuously and then set about to remove the constraints of that oath. Their cry will become, “We must defend America from these radical barbarians at all costs! If you don’t give us the power to do this, in all cases whatsoever, you won’t have your Liberty because we will all be dead.” Enter the “Necessity Plea.”

The danger we are facing is the attitude that Liberty doesn’t matter, that any boundary and limit of government can be violated if you can come up with a good enough reason. Then those who control the narrative will be able to use any reason at any time to violate the Liberty of an uninformed people for the purposes of power and control.

Our framers lived through ALL of these scenarios prior to our Independence. There is a reason they declared the purpose of the union was to “Preserve the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”  There is a reason John Adams wrote in 1765 that “Liberty must at all hazards be supported.” There is a reason that Samuel Adams wrote:

“No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.”

We cannot let our ignorance destroy our Liberty in the face of ignorance and fear. There is a reason that Patrick Henry asked these questions and made his final stand:

“What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Without Liberty, you are a slave, and your life is not worth living. Without Liberty, your peace, your national security, will become your chains and bonds.

These are the times that will try men’s souls. We will see what Americans really want. Do we want to remain the greatest place on earth, established on the fundamental principle of Liberty? Or do we want to be just like every other country in the world, driven by fear and dictated by government power?

On an individual level, I will simply say that no person’s fear ever trumps my Rights. And as for me and my house, we stand with Patrick Henry.


The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.