It was a novel idea that shattered the prevailing view that sovereignty lay with the English monarch or parliament.

The Framers divided governmental power in this manner because they had seen firsthand, from their experience with Britain that concentrated authority predictably results in tyranny. 

This simple, revolutionary idea shaped our nation.

In the words of Justice Kennedy: “The Framers split the atom of sovereignty.” That is, the Framers ingeniously divided governmental power through various mechanisms, such as the separation of powers and federalism. They separated the legislative, executive, and judicial powers into three distinct branches of a federal government.

Madison famously noted: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” This same concern was present in creating the treaty power.

Because treaties are the supreme law of the land, they could potentially become a vehicle for the federal government either to give away power to international actors or to accumulate power otherwise reserved for the states or individuals.

Either possibility can be prevented if sufficient limits are placed on the federal government’s authority to make and implement treaties.

In observing that a President could abuse the treaty power for his personal gain if the President alone possessed this power, Hamilton stated:

“The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”

The Framers understood that while the executive branch was best positioned to manage the business of “negotiating treaties”, the President must inform and act by the advice and consent of the Senate.”

The President’s power to make treaties is therefore clearly limited by the procedures required by the Treaty Clause. This clause gives the President the “Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

This places an obvious limitation on the President’s power to make treaties: If less than two-thirds of the Senators present concur that the treaty should be made, then the United States has not made any treaty. The President therefore cannot unilaterally enter into a treaty.

Does it not appear clearly evident from the Treaty Limitation Clause described above that any document emerging from negotiations with a foreign Power, in which Congress was not actively engaged in this manner is not a valid treaty?

Does it not also appear that the notion of the President vetoing Congress effectively annuls the limitation placed on him by the Treaty Clause of the Constitution?

My question is therefore: How did we get from the Constitutional requirement of the President to inform and engage and get a two-thirds approval from Congress, to him threatening to veto Congress`s disapproval? Someone must have found the legal language to reframe the Treaty Limitation Clause to how it’s being currently implemented: Congress has to approve the President`s Treaty. If they disapprove, he will veto it, and the Executive Branch can declare they have a valid and legally binding Treaty with or without Congress`s approval.

However, at this juncture, Mr. Obama, Kerry, and their negotiating team have signed a “treaty” which is opposed by the majority of Congress.

To quote the Limitation of Treaty Clause: “ lf less than two-thirds of the Senators concur that the treaty should be made, then the United States has not made any treaty”.

Ignoring Congress (disparagingly) and presenting the “treaty” for ratification by the U.N Security Council, then threatening to veto a Congressional override, is a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution, where Mr. Obama is brazenly declaring his Imperial Presidency.

In one act, it shatters the republic at its foundation, since it recreates a Monarchy from which the Founding Fathers painstakingly attempted to protect us from.

Another violation is that John Kerry reassured Congress that the world`s leading terrorist Suleimani, would not have travel restrictions lifted at the same time that this Revolutionary Guard Senior missile and explosives expert was already in Russia purchasing the world`s most lethal weapons.

This puts thousands of American military personnel in danger, and already threatens Iran`s neighbors.

While Mr. Obama routinely ignores the Constitution, this particular disregard of the “Treaty Clause” is being applied to a situation where by violating the Constitution, the Executive Branch has already ignored congress and given the green light to foreign powers to promote the world`s greatest terrorist state into a nuclear superpower.