Skip to main content

View Diary: Texas AG Threatens to Arrest Election Monitors (41 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Federal v State Authority in International Matters (0+ / 0-)

    The United States is a participant in the OSCE/ODIHR via a memorandum of understanding (MOU).  Sometime a MOU is considered a treaty, sometimes not, but the end result is the same. Most forms of international agreements were invented 100+ years after the Constitution was approved. Nevertheless the Constitution clearly indicates that the federal government prevails in matters of international agreements (Article 6; Article 2, Section 2). To assume otherwise would be to invite each of the 50 states to engage in its own international agreements.  Can you imagine the chaos of letting rogue states like Texas create their own particular international agreements?  The resulting mess of such under The Articles of Confederation was one of the chief reasons for replacing the Articles with the Constitution. Both the Constitution and the long history of United States international agreements indicate that federal power trumps state power. In 2012 only a Constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court decision to the contrary would allow states to get into international affairs.

    Of course a different federal administration could choose to withdraw from or modify current international agreements, but that first would require the winning of 270 electoral votes.

    In the meantime, Abbott, Perry, et al. should join George Wallace and other Southern grandstanders in stepping aside in federal matters.  Either that or find themselves facing a federalized "Texas" national guard tasked with enforcing a federal court order.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site