NEWSFLASH FOR OUR IMPERIAL PRESIDENT: STATES CAN REFUSE IRAN DEAL [Video]As Barack Hussein Obama tours around the country trying to convince the low information voter that the lopsided and dangerous deal he and John Kerry cut with Iran is somehow beneficial to the United States of America he may want to consider the states can shut down his deal if they so choose to act.The Obama administration has sent the Iran nuclear deal to Congress for a 60-day review provided by the Corker bill. However, President Barack Obama has pre-empted Congress by going to the UN Security Council first, which has already voted to end international sanctions and accept the deal. Furthermore, even if Congress rejects the deal, it will struggle to muster a two-thirds majority to override the president s veto.There is one effective way, however, that the Iran deal can be rejected: states and local governments can refuse to comply with it.That may come as a surprise. States and local governments do not play much of a role in foreign policy. However, they cannot be forced to implement an international treaty or agreement that is not self-executing i.e. one whose implementation requires new congressional laws.Thanks to the victory at the Supreme Court by then-Texas Solicitor General Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)96% in Medell n v. Texas (2008), it is a settled principle in constitutional law that states cannot be forced to comply with international treaties unless Congress has passed statutes giving them effect.The Iran deal stipulates (p. 15):25. If a law at the state or local level in the United States is preventing the implementation of the sanctions lifting as specified in this JCPOA, the United States will take appropriate steps, taking into account all available authorities, with a view to achieving such implementation. The United States will actively encourage officials at the state or local level to take into account the changes in the U.S. policy reflected in the lifting of sanctions under this JCPOA and to refrain from actions inconsistent with this change in policy.The  sanctions  to which the deal refers are the array of divestment laws that have been passed in recent years to prevent pension funds and contractors from providing economic benefits to Iranian companies the Iranian regime. 30 states have passed divestment laws, roughly a dozen have passed contracting restrictions, and some have passed supplemental legislation, such as a 2012 law passed in California that applies to the state s insurance industry.Many of the states that have applied harsh restrictions on Iran, moreover, are liberal  blue  states. New York, for example, maintains a blacklist of persons  determined to be engaged in investment activities in Iran. As the state government explains further:  Once an entity appears on the list, it will be considered a non-responsive bidder/offerer and prohibited from entering into contracts with New York State or local governments.  That includes companies that are not Iranian themselves, but do business with Iran.The Iran deal lifts sanctions on some companies that appear on New York s blacklist. However, the state restrictions remain in force.The Iran deal obligates the federal government to take  appropriate steps  to cancel state and local restrictions, and requires the government to refrain from further sanctions in the future. The truth is that the federal government has no constitutional authority to do so.Divestment laws and contracting restrictions can remain in place at the state and local level until they are superseded by federal statute. The language of the Iran deal itself is not enough to constitute such statutory authority, even if the Iran deal does pass by failure to override Obama s veto.If the states want, they can add new sanctions and restrictions on Iran perhaps to replace those that the federal government is lifting, such as restrictions on Iranian engineers studying nuclear technology at American universities.The Iran deal specifies that Iran will treat  an an imposition of new nuclear-related sanctions, as grounds to cease performing its commitments.  That paragraph (27) deals with federal sanctions, but is written vaguely.That leaves great power in the states  hands to trigger the deal s collapse or force Obama to re-negotiate.Via: Breitbart Newsleft-news
newsflash for our imperial president states can refuse iran deal video as barack hussain obama tours around country trying convince low information voter lopsided dangerous deal john kerry cut iran somehow beneficial united states america may want consider states shut deal choose obama administration sent iran nuclear deal congress review provided corner bill however president barack obama congress going un security council first already voted end international sanctions accept deal furthermore even congress rejects deal struggle muster majority override president one effective way however iran deal rejected states local governments refuse comply may come surprise states local governments play much role foreign policy however forced implement international treaty agreement one whose implementation requires new congressional victory supreme court solicitor general ted cruz model n texas settled principle constitutional law states forced comply international treaties unless congress passed statutes giving iran deal stipulates if law state local level united states preventing implementation sanctions lifting specified coa united states take appropriate steps taking account available authorities view achieving implementation the united states actively encourage officials state local level take account changes policy reflected lifting sanctions coa refrain actions inconsistent change sanctions deal refers array investment laws passed recent years prevent pension funds contractors providing economic benefits iranian companies iranian regime states passed investment laws roughly dozen passed contracting restrictions passed supplemental legislation law passed california applies state insurance states applied harsh restrictions iran moreover liberal blue states new york example maintains blacklist persons determined engaged investment activities iran as state government explains once entity appears list considered prohibited entering contracts new york state local governments that includes companies iranian business iran deal lifts sanctions companies appear new york blacklist however state restrictions remain iran deal obligated federal government take appropriate steps cancel state local restrictions requires government refrain sanctions future the truth federal government constitutional authority laws contracting restrictions remain place state local level superseded federal statute the language iran deal enough constitute statutory authority even iran deal pass failure override obama states want add new sanctions restrictions iran perhaps replace federal government lifting restrictions iranian engineers studying nuclear technology american iran deal specifies iran treat imposition new sanctions grounds cease performing commitments that paragraph deals federal sanctions written leaves great power states hands trigger deal collapse force obama breitbart
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: NEWSFLASH FOR OUR IMPERIAL PRESIDENT: STATES CAN REFUSE IRAN DEAL [Video]As Barack Hussein Obama tours around the country trying to convince the low information voter that the lopsided and dangerous deal he and John Kerry cut with Iran is somehow beneficial to the United States of America he may want to consider the states can shut down his deal if they so choose to act.The Obama administration has sent the Iran nuclear deal to Congress for a 60-day review provided by the Corker bill. However, President Barack Obama has pre-empted Congress by going to the UN Security Council first, which has already voted to end international sanctions and accept the deal. Furthermore, even if Congress rejects the deal, it will struggle to muster a two-thirds majority to override the president s veto.There is one effective way, however, that the Iran deal can be rejected: states and local governments can refuse to comply with it.That may come as a surprise. States and local governments do not play much of a role in foreign policy. However, they cannot be forced to implement an international treaty or agreement that is not self-executing i.e. one whose implementation requires new congressional laws.Thanks to the victory at the Supreme Court by then-Texas Solicitor General Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)96% in Medell n v. Texas (2008), it is a settled principle in constitutional law that states cannot be forced to comply with international treaties unless Congress has passed statutes giving them effect.The Iran deal stipulates (p. 15):25. If a law at the state or local level in the United States is preventing the implementation of the sanctions lifting as specified in this JCPOA, the United States will take appropriate steps, taking into account all available authorities, with a view to achieving such implementation. The United States will actively encourage officials at the state or local level to take into account the changes in the U.S. policy reflected in the lifting of sanctions under this JCPOA and to refrain from actions inconsistent with this change in policy.The  sanctions  to which the deal refers are the array of divestment laws that have been passed in recent years to prevent pension funds and contractors from providing economic benefits to Iranian companies the Iranian regime. 30 states have passed divestment laws, roughly a dozen have passed contracting restrictions, and some have passed supplemental legislation, such as a 2012 law passed in California that applies to the state s insurance industry.Many of the states that have applied harsh restrictions on Iran, moreover, are liberal  blue  states. New York, for example, maintains a blacklist of persons  determined to be engaged in investment activities in Iran. As the state government explains further:  Once an entity appears on the list, it will be considered a non-responsive bidder/offerer and prohibited from entering into contracts with New York State or local governments.  That includes companies that are not Iranian themselves, but do business with Iran.The Iran deal lifts sanctions on some companies that appear on New York s blacklist. However, the state restrictions remain in force.The Iran deal obligates the federal government to take  appropriate steps  to cancel state and local restrictions, and requires the government to refrain from further sanctions in the future. The truth is that the federal government has no constitutional authority to do so.Divestment laws and contracting restrictions can remain in place at the state and local level until they are superseded by federal statute. The language of the Iran deal itself is not enough to constitute such statutory authority, even if the Iran deal does pass by failure to override Obama s veto.If the states want, they can add new sanctions and restrictions on Iran perhaps to replace those that the federal government is lifting, such as restrictions on Iranian engineers studying nuclear technology at American universities.The Iran deal specifies that Iran will treat  an an imposition of new nuclear-related sanctions, as grounds to cease performing its commitments.  That paragraph (27) deals with federal sanctions, but is written vaguely.That leaves great power in the states  hands to trigger the deal s collapse or force Obama to re-negotiate.Via: Breitbart Newsleft-news
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: newsflash for our imperial president states can refuse iran deal video as barack hussain obama tours around country trying convince low information voter lopsided dangerous deal john kerry cut iran somehow beneficial united states america may want consider states shut deal choose obama administration sent iran nuclear deal congress review provided corner bill however president barack obama congress going un security council first already voted end international sanctions accept deal furthermore even congress rejects deal struggle muster majority override president one effective way however iran deal rejected states local governments refuse comply may come surprise states local governments play much role foreign policy however forced implement international treaty agreement one whose implementation requires new congressional victory supreme court solicitor general ted cruz model n texas settled principle constitutional law states forced comply international treaties unless congress passed statutes giving iran deal stipulates if law state local level united states preventing implementation sanctions lifting specified coa united states take appropriate steps taking account available authorities view achieving implementation the united states actively encourage officials state local level take account changes policy reflected lifting sanctions coa refrain actions inconsistent change sanctions deal refers array investment laws passed recent years prevent pension funds contractors providing economic benefits iranian companies iranian regime states passed investment laws roughly dozen passed contracting restrictions passed supplemental legislation law passed california applies state insurance states applied harsh restrictions iran moreover liberal blue states new york example maintains blacklist persons determined engaged investment activities iran as state government explains once entity appears list considered prohibited entering contracts new york state local governments that includes companies iranian business iran deal lifts sanctions companies appear new york blacklist however state restrictions remain iran deal obligated federal government take appropriate steps cancel state local restrictions requires government refrain sanctions future the truth federal government constitutional authority laws contracting restrictions remain place state local level superseded federal statute the language iran deal enough constitute statutory authority even iran deal pass failure override obama states want add new sanctions restrictions iran perhaps replace federal government lifting restrictions iranian engineers studying nuclear technology american iran deal specifies iran treat imposition new sanctions grounds cease performing commitments that paragraph deals federal sanctions written leaves great power states hands trigger deal collapse force obama breitbart