The United Nations’ Pact for the Future promises global cooperation, but critics argue it undermines U.S. sovereignty and threatens constitutional rights.

On September 23, 2024, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Pact for the Future, a comprehensive document aimed at addressing global challenges like climate change, inequality, and artificial intelligence. While the pact is celebrated for its global vision, it has sparked significant concern in the United States, where critics argue it threatens U.S. sovereignty and the Constitution. Several grassroots organizations–including Stand for Health Freedom, Children’s Health Defense, and the World Council for Health–are actively opposing the potential infringement on U.S. law and individual rights by global governance frameworks.

The Pact for the Future risks conflicting with the U.S. Constitution, undermining principles like state sovereignty, freedom of speech, and individual liberties. It could open the door to executive overreach and subordination of U.S. law to international regulations, violating core constitutional protections.

1. Treaty Ratification and Executive Overreach

The U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 2) mandates that all international treaties must be ratified by a two-thirds majority in the Senate. The Pact for the Future encourages heads of state to take unilateral action in implementing global agreements, bypassing legislative oversight. This could lead to executive overreach, where the President might commit to international agreements without Senate approval, a violation of the separation of powers designed to protect American sovereignty.1

2. Subordination of U.S. Law to International Bodies

The Supremacy Clause (Article VI) establishes that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, meaning no international law can override it unless properly ratified. The Pact for the Future calls for increased global governance, including through a Global Digital Compact that could impose international regulations on digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and online speech. These could conflict with U.S. First Amendment protections, particularly around free speech, threatening to subordinate U.S. law to international bodies without proper constitutional oversight.2

3. Erosion of States’ Rights and the Federalist System

The Tenth Amendment reserves powers not explicitly delegated to the federal government to the states or the people. The Pact for the Future could force U.S. states to adopt policies mandated by international bodies, potentially infringing on states’ rights to self-governance. For instance, global environmental and economic policies could override state-specific priorities regarding energy production and economic development, eroding federalism, a core principle of U.S. governance.3

4. The First Amendment: Threats to Free Speech

The Pact for the Future emphasizes efforts to combat misinformation and disinformation, particularly online. While this may seem necessary in the digital age, it raises concerns about the First Amendment, which protects free speech. The pact’s push for global regulations through the Global Digital Compact could lead to censorship, especially of dissenting voices, in areas like health, politics, and environmental policy. Organizations such as the Foundation for Freedom Online (FFO) argue that these international regulations could violate U.S. free speech protections.4

5. Second Amendment Conflicts: Disarmament and Firearm Rights

The Pact for the Future commits to disarmament and regulation of small arms, which may conflict with the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Global commitments to disarmament could impose stricter firearm regulations than those currently allowed under U.S. law, infringing on Americans’ constitutional rights. The National Health Federation (NHF) and other grassroots organizations are concerned about international mandates that conflict with the Second Amendment.5

Read More