Treaties UN and Law of the Land (or Estate)

[allodial]

The aforementioned case was referred to in a book by a Curtis B. Dall a son-in-law of Franklin Delanoa ROOSEVELT:

Upon inquiring about the U.N., I began to get some glib, tailored remarks in reply to my questions. Replies such as, "You know that the United Nations Charter is the Supreme Law of the Land; because it is a Treaty, and you know that there is a "loop-hole" in Article Six, paragraph two, of the U. S. Constitution." That "loop-hole" talk sounded rather "fishy", with due respect to the diversionary eloquence of the late John Foster Dulles. He was a prominent New York lawyer, a busy wheeler and dealer for the C.F.R.'s international program, one that was firmly stuffed down the throat of both Democratic and Republican political parties. So I turned to Article Six, paragraph two, in a copy of the U.S. Constitution and began reading. Then I read it a second and third time. Next day, I read it again.

That Article does not take a Washington-Harvard lawyer to explain, with a self-serving twist. It is written very plainly. There is no "loop-hole", Mr. Dulles, to the contrary notwithstanding! The big-lie technique is to repeat something often enough so that it begins to sound plausible. Such is the case here. Article Six, paragraph two, states: "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 contrary notwithstanding." (Italics, mine.)

Hence, the U. S. Constitution (note the capital C), its Laws, and valid Treaties—all three of them, are designated as being Supreme. Hence, how can any one of those three areas be honestly termed as being Supreme? Particularly so, at the expense of the other two! It is quite impossible! Yet it is often attempted by those who wish to deceive. The sometimes quoted case, Fujii vs. California, 1950, in their Court of Appeals, is one instance where a respectable "frame", is placed about a deceitful "picture", which rests upon an unconstitutional foundation. So, the Charter of the U. N. is not "the Supreme Law of the Land!" Certainly not that of the U.S.A., which is OUR Land. Again, there is no "loophole"! (page 123)

Perchance, some adroit political lawyer under pressure may try to apply, out of context, the words at the end of Article Six, paragraph two, referring to the constitution of any state (small c, and small s) and apply it to the top line, which refers to the U.S. Constitution (capital C). Such an effort would be little more than a bold attempt to deceive those who have not carefully read Article Six, paragraph two.

Accordingly, I desire to explode the fallacy of that misleading "Supreme Law of the Land" talk, so often printed and whispered about. (Read Article Six, paragraph two, and satisfy yourself). Any self-executing contract, such as the U.N. Charter, attempting to invade and dilute our Sovereign Rights in various ways, threatening our Constitution, must secure a Constitutional Amendment to be valid in the U.S.A.