Power Derives from Lawful Authority

Subject: txt owg grn -
The President of the United States has no more legal right to sign a treaty that turns legislative, executive, and judicial functions of our national government over to the United Nations than he has to declare the United States an Islamic Republic and its people henceforward subject to Sharia.

Nevertheless, that would be the effect of the proposed United Nations Climate Change Treaty awaiting Mr. Obama's signature in Copenhagen this coming December.

The proposed treaty authorizes the establishment of a "government" to transfer wealth from industrial nations to non-industrial nations in payment of a "climate debt" which, the treaty 'declares', the industrial nations owe on account of burning carbon-based fuels.

The newly created international government is to have the authority to decide issues relating to carbon emissions in signatory nations, the power to levy what amounts to carbon taxes on signatory nations, and the power to enforce its levies without reference to the will of the people who live in the signatory nations.

Thus, the proposed Climate Change Treaty demands that: [specifics, all a transfer of sovereignty - snip]

So, given what the treaty portends, the obvious question is, does it pass constitutional muster?

The answer is rooted in American constitutional history, which is that no President, even with the advice and consent of the Senate, has the power to transfer legislative, executive, or judicial authority to any body in derogation of the manner in which such authority is granted by the United States Constitution.

A presidential signature and senatorial ratification is merely the process by which a treaty takes on the outward garments of lawfulness. The substance of the treaty must also be lawful. as defined by the tenants of our Constitution.

• "The ... powers of the national government are limited by the constitutional grants. Those who act under these grants are not at liberty to transcend the imposed limits because they believe that more or different power is necessary."
• "The Constitution provides that 'All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States' (and the) ... Congress is not permitted to abdicate or to transfer to others the essential legislative functions with which it is thus vested [3]."

To be lawful under our Constitution, a treaty may not impinge on the constitutional grant of powers to the President, to Congress, or to the Judiciary... [snip]

In the end, the question is whether the 200+ page Climate Change Treaty oversteps the constitutional limitations on the delegation of powers that are allocated to the various branches of our federal government. We can find out for certain only by a vote of five or more members of the United States Supreme Court - which history has shown to be an unreliable safety net for the preservation of America's constitutional democracy.

That's why it's critical we hold our Senators' feet to the fire on this issue.

We don't need another national trauma, and we can avoid one by making sure our Senators withhold their consent to the proposed Climate Change Treaty when Mr. Obama signs and submits it...

[Read the above skipped 'specifics' to know what we're in for should we fail >

READ MORE

Then >


"DENY SENATE CONSENT of CLIMATE CHANGE 'TREATY' "


Senate-Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
YOUR Senator: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

or: Speed Message them with your personal distribution list...

and as always, pass it on...

contact-template