like that ordinarily occurs the way we in this government to a constitution we ordinarily deal with is we go to the legislature and we get a bill passed that acknowledges th to article six turner this is a fun case for me i just want you to know we don't often get treaties to interpret up here so much so i really have not of the union undertake to let's stop right there the union we're talking about assume is not the union we fought the civil war over it's the union nation state and i correct about to countries of the union nations states explained to me why you think a i think the district of columbia probably be thought of as a municipality at the present time explaining why you think it municipality has a right against its own state nation state that is the united states government under the treaty that talks only about right state emblems of countries of the union so it clearly is is addressing the countries of the union and their particular i assume united states flag would be one of those countries do about other countries and their municipalities trademarks i get that ok so then you get to six per message isn't which is an exception to that  statement and olding in the charming that's the case which is act of congress ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations if any other possible construction exists remains but when i looked at your briefs i expected to find frankly when you invoke the can paris convention there would be something in it that require the countries that were part of it required them to allow their leaders to pallet ease to register their trademarks but there's nothing in there that says that is there was your honor i believe there is tell me where that comes from as an actual obligation on those countries parts to allow their is every trademark duly registered in the country of origin whatever that may be may be a municipal is a good it may be something else every trademark but it may not be it may not the united states doesn't allow it i don't see basically you're arguing that this treaty authorizes the district of columbia to override national law and united states assuming for the moment that national law prohibits the trademarking your trademark your emblem you are saying that this treaty authorizes polities like the district of columbia two to override to repeal the effect of the trademark law not not not not really your own arguing is that you have to look at what originally pennsauken for refusal provision agrees to refuse yet that first and foremost that is the language they want to flip that language should say he must register it it is always been about for hitting from being registered at st mark's if he says the purpose conventional comes into play if he wins on the basic argument concerning the interpretation of the lemon lime act then other with regard to craig marking of kosovo hardship municipalities i don't think that's what the treaty is designed to do i think the treaty is designed to say these things should be registered as dreamers for we recognize them countries want to be able to do that language countries interviewing and undertake to refuse the registration failing authorisation from the commons authority well we have authorization from the competent authority here the district is trying to register its own  a so i think they're just wrong and say it's permissive because there is a separate part of the statute which is not permissive six second way you have been used quite to any place where anyone