Kerry to sign UN arms treaty...

[logroller]

Well, he signed it.

I was pretty sure the process was it goes to the Senate FIRST, then if they approve it goes to the PRESIDENT. That nobody else has any business 'signing' anything. But once the Senate shoots this one down, Kerry will now look like an even bigger fool (if that's possible).

I believe it has something to do with the multilateral process: that the treaty is signed but not yet ratified. Ratification is the process by which it actually enters into force, and even then only after the treaty's prescribed number of ratifications take place. But it doesn't effect those who haven't ratified it. Regardless, Kerry can't ratify it, only Obama can and only with consent of the senate. So this whole Kerry signed it thing is benign.

From Wikipedia :

Ratification is a principal's approval of an act of its agent where the agent lacked authority to legally bind the principal. The term applies to private contract law, international treaties, and constitutionals in federations such as the United States and Canada.

[Larrymc]

There has been talk about this 'treaty' before, and how it may be used to take away more 2nd amendment rights.

It appears Kerry is going to sign it, without approval from the Senate.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...rs-opposition/



Which of course means it is non-binding. But we sort of have a tread of bypassing the system in DC, don't we?


So of course a letter was sent to Obama letting him know he better not act as if the Senate had approved it.


http://www.foreign.senate.gov/press/...ce-and-consent

If he were to try to implement it, you'd finally be talking about clear violations of his office, and most likely a clear path to impeachment.

The arrogance of this Administration is never ending.