Your rebuttal is based on our government actually following the Constitution.
No, my rebuttal is based on our government actually following the Constitution as currently interpreted by existing Constitutional caselaw. Which, for the history of the nation, we do an excellent job. You may not agree with the caselaw, but it is followed.
If I were relying on JUST the Constitution, then yes, the international treaty WOULD override the Constitution, as there is nothing in the Constitution that says "International treaties do not override this." It took caselaw to confirm that. Remember, if it isn't explicitly forbidden, it's absolutely permitted.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2013-07-26 08:28 pm (UTC)No, my rebuttal is based on our government actually following the Constitution as currently interpreted by existing Constitutional caselaw. Which, for the history of the nation, we do an excellent job. You may not agree with the caselaw, but it is followed.
If I were relying on JUST the Constitution, then yes, the international treaty WOULD override the Constitution, as there is nothing in the Constitution that says "International treaties do not override this." It took caselaw to confirm that. Remember, if it isn't explicitly forbidden, it's absolutely permitted.