Re:Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana
by bradleyjg on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @07:11PM
(#8565072)
>because treaties ratified by the US have almost constitutional standing in legal terms, and need to be formally derogated rather than legislated away.
As a matter of domestic law, that's not the case. Treaties are on the same level as federal legislation and the last in time controls. There are a series of court cases that disfavor implied abrogragation under comity principles, but if a later-in-time statute is in clear and unavoidable conflict with an earlier treaty, the statute controls.
Re:Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana
by anigbrowl on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @09:51PM
(#8565562)
Thanks for the correction. I certainly overstated it - I was thinking about pre-emption of state law and the limits of administrative fiat, and let my imagination run away a bit!
As a matter of domestic law, that's not the case. Treaties are on the same level as federal legislation and the last in time controls. There are a series of court cases that disfavor implied abrogragation under comity principles, but if a later-in-time statute is in clear and unavoidable conflict with an earlier treaty, the statute controls.