```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 99 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 99

 Expressing the sense of the Senate that the primary safeguard for the 
   well-being and protection of children is the family, and that the 
   primary safeguards for the legal rights of children in the United 
   States are the Constitutions of the United States and the several 
 States, and that, because the use of international treaties to govern 
  policy in the United States on families and children is contrary to 
  principles of self-government and federalism, and that, because the 
    United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child undermines 
 traditional principles of law in the United States regarding parents 
 and children, the President should not transmit the Convention to the 
                   Senate for its advice and consent.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 10, 2011

    Mr. DeMint (for himself, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Burr, Mr. Blunt, Mr. 
Boozman, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Ensign, 
  Mr. Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Hatch, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. 
 Inhofe, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Johnson of Wisconsin, Mr. Kyl, 
  Mr. Lee, Mr. McCain, Mr. Moran, Mr. Paul, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rubio, Mr. 
     Sessions, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Wicker) submitted the following 
  resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the Senate that the primary safeguard for the 
   well-being and protection of children is the family, and that the 
   primary safeguards for the legal rights of children in the United 
   States are the Constitutions of the United States and the several 
 States, and that, because the use of international treaties to govern 
  policy in the United States on families and children is contrary to 
  principles of self-government and federalism, and that, because the 
    United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child undermines 
 traditional principles of law in the United States regarding parents 
 and children, the President should not transmit the Convention to the 
                   Senate for its advice and consent.

Whereas the Senate affirms the commitment of the people and the Government of 
        the United States to the well-being, protection, and advancement of 
        children, and the protection of the inalienable rights of all persons of 
        all ages;
Whereas the Constitution and laws of the United States and those of the several 
        States are the best guarantees against mistreatment of children in this 
        Nation;
Whereas the Constitution, laws, and traditions of the United States affirm the 
        rights of parents to raise their children and to impart their values and 
        religious beliefs;
Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted at New 
        York November 20, 1989, and entered into force September 2, 1990, if 
        ratified, would become a part of the supreme law of the land, taking 
        precedence over all State laws and constitutions;
Whereas the United States, and not the several States, would be held responsible 
        for compliance with this Convention if ratified, and as a consequence, 
        the United States would create an incredible expansion of subject matter 
        jurisdiction over all matters concerning children, seriously undermining 
        the constitutional balance between the Federal Government and the 
        governments of the several States;
Whereas Professor Geraldine Van Bueren, the author of the principal textbook on 
        the international rights of the child, and a participant in the drafting 
        of the Convention, has described the ``best interest of the child 
        standard'' in the treaty as ``provid[ing] decision and policy makers 
        with the authority to substitute their own decisions for either the 
        child's or the parents'';
Whereas the Scottish Government has issued a pamphlet to children of that 
        country explaining their rights under the Convention, which declares 
        that children have the right to decide their own religion and that 
        parents can only provide advice;
Whereas the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has repeatedly 
        interpreted the Convention to ban common disciplinary measures utilized 
        by parents;
Whereas the Government of the United Kingdom was found to be in violation of the 
        Convention by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child 
        for allowing parents to exercise a right to opt their children out of 
        sex education courses in the public schools without a prior government 
        review of the wishes of the child;
Whereas the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has held that 
        the Governments of Indonesia and Egypt were out of compliance with the 
        Convention because military expenditures were given inappropriate 
        priority over children's programs;
Whereas these and many other interpretations of the Convention by those charged 
        with its implementation and by other authoritative supporters 
        demonstrates that the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the 
        Rights of the Child are utterly contrary to the principles of law in the 
        United States and the inherent principles of freedom;
Whereas the decisions and interpretations of the United Nations Committee on the 
        Rights of the Child would be considered by the Committee to be binding 
        and authoritative upon the United States should the United States 
        Government ratify the Convention, such that the Convention poses a 
        threat to the sovereign rights of the United States and the several 
        States to make final determinations regarding domestic law; and
Whereas the proposition that the United States should be governed by 
        international legal standards in its domestic policy is tantamount to 
        proclaiming that the Congress of the United States and the legislatures 
        of the several States are incompetent to draft domestic laws that are 
        necessary for the proper protection of children, an assertion that is 
        not only an affront to self-government but an inappropriate attack on 
        the capability of legislators in the United States: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--
            (1) the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the 
        Child, adopted at New York November 20, 1989, and entered into 
        force September 2, 1990, is incompatible with the Constitution, 
        the laws, and the traditions of the United States;
            (2) the Convention would undermine proper presumptions of 
        freedom and independence for families in the United States, 
        supplanting those principles with a presumption in favor of 
        governmental intervention without the necessity for proving 
        harm or wrong-doing;
            (3) the Convention would interfere with the principles of 
        sovereignty, independence, and self-government in the United 
        States that preclude the necessity or propriety of adopting 
        international law to govern domestic matters; and
            (4) the President should not transmit the Convention to the 
        Senate for its advice and consent.
                                 <all>
```