08-06-2019, 03:56 AM
Kaimana - Read their excuse about the "whereas" clauses and tell me that it makes any sense to you. Be honest. lol.
But of course Supreme Court findings are not subject to the review of your opinion or mine. Some opinions are far more equal than others.
Also the Apology Resolution isn't even needed to prove they never annexed Hawaii. There is no treaty, congress has no power to annex a sovereign nation into the US as a territory
When the sovereign nation is ceding the territory things are quite different. See South Carolina's ceding territory upon admission to the union, the Republic of Texas, etc... done through joint resolutions. More recently see the Vienna Convention for all the various means through which International agreements and laws are reached including through separate documents signifying the intent of both parties.
the Senate did not vote with 2/3rds consent of all Senators present(42 to 21, with 26 abstentions), which is explicitly stated as needed to ratify a treaty.
The argument that the U.S. Senate has not been counting votes correctly because it only requires a 2/3rds of yes votes (not 2/3rds of Senators "present" with some abstaining) is a new one to me. Be sure to let them know they've been doing it wrong for 225+ years - I'm sure they value your thoughts on the matter.
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/his...eaties.htm
But of course Supreme Court findings are not subject to the review of your opinion or mine. Some opinions are far more equal than others.
Also the Apology Resolution isn't even needed to prove they never annexed Hawaii. There is no treaty, congress has no power to annex a sovereign nation into the US as a territory
When the sovereign nation is ceding the territory things are quite different. See South Carolina's ceding territory upon admission to the union, the Republic of Texas, etc... done through joint resolutions. More recently see the Vienna Convention for all the various means through which International agreements and laws are reached including through separate documents signifying the intent of both parties.
the Senate did not vote with 2/3rds consent of all Senators present(42 to 21, with 26 abstentions), which is explicitly stated as needed to ratify a treaty.
The argument that the U.S. Senate has not been counting votes correctly because it only requires a 2/3rds of yes votes (not 2/3rds of Senators "present" with some abstaining) is a new one to me. Be sure to let them know they've been doing it wrong for 225+ years - I'm sure they value your thoughts on the matter.
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/his...eaties.htm