Abbott sent a letter to President Obama, stating that “Treaties do not trump constitutional liberties. Even if you, as the President, signed and the Senate ratified the UN Arms Trade Treaty, our Constitution remains the Supreme Law of the Land and would supersede any treaty provision that violated Second Amendment rights.”
Abbott bases his logic on the 1957 Reid v Covert case, in which the US Supreme Court ruled that treaties do not trump rights spelled out in the Constitution. Abbott says he is prepared to take the federal government to court if it ratifies the U.N. pact to defend Americans’ right to keep and bear arms.
I find the notion of Obama using accession in order to get the treaty effectively approved quite disturbing:
It is doubtful he can get a two-thirds vote in the Senate to radify, so expect the attempted end-run of accession, which has been used in the recent past (United States Accedes to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia).
I’m not a lawyer, but would welcome comments on this.