Surely enough, we've all heard the whining from every liberal city and state in the country about how regardless of Trump's removal of America from the Paris Climate Accord, they're just going to sign up anyway.
Pardon my ignorance, since I'm not exactly a scholar of constitutional law. But seeing as how the Paris Accord is a multi-national treaty, doesn't that violate the contract clause? Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States, Section 10, Clause 1 states, and I quote-
"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."
So, that being the case, wouldn't it be illegal for any individual state to attempt to ratify this treaty on their own, without the consent of the federal government? I haven't done a ton of research on the subject, but there's some faff about it being a "Executive Agreement instead of a Treaty," What does that even mean in this context? Someone more educated on the topic please enlighten me, it would make my day to know that all the coastal liberals can't do shit and have to sit back and accept the US and all of it's constituent states and territories, as a whole, will in no way, shape, or form be involved in their precious "Climate Agreement."
view the rest of the comments →
[–] cynicaloldfart ago (edited ago)
As I know nothing about about the legality of entering into an "agreement' with other governments, I can assume any attempt to get US federal funding would quickly be denied. If they find they would be required to give funds to foreign entities and not receive funds, they will surely stop their bs. When a city or company needs to be paid to stop polluting that should tell you where their priorities lie.