The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Today in Supreme Court History: April 19, 1920
4/19/1920: Missouri v. Holland decided.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Wiki provides a point on this case that I never thought of:
"Many legal analysts have argued that the decision [that treaties are the law of the land and apply to states], implies that Congress and the President can essentially amend the Constitution by means of treaties with other countries."
I'm not sure about amending the Constitution but I could see a President and 2/3s of Senators creating a treaty which could have major implications, e.g. a treaty that bans executions, etc.
It should be noted that Missouri v. Holland was greatly narrowed by Reid v. Covert (1957), which ruled that a treaty could not be used to circumvent the Bill of Rights or to otherwise get around a clear provision of the Constitution. This means a treaty regarding the Constitution can be used only as a tiebreaker when the Constitution is unclear.
I think Missouri v. Holland was wrongly decided and should be overruled, but Reid v. Covert has greatly limited the damage the former decision can wrought.
A treaty about the boundary with Canada prohibited the spread of slavery to any more states. Dred Scott violated that ratified treaty.
The Rush–Bagot Treaty is my favorite treaty.
It's why we have the longest, undefended border in the world.