Do the constitutional structural limits on federal authority impose constraints on the scope of Congress authority to enact legislation to implement a valid treaty, at least in circumstances where the federal statute, as applied, goes beyond the scope of the treaty, intrudes on the traditional state prerogatives, and is concededly unnecessary to satisfy the government's treaty obligations?

In 2014 the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional as applied §229, criminal provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act, located in Title 22 Chapter 75. (See Bond V U.S 12-158) Also in that case Justice Thomas stated "There will come a case where this court .will have to decide the constitutionally of statutes implementing a treaty and the use of the dictum in Missouri v Holland. The Trafficking And Victims Protection Act also located in Title 22 Chapter <78, carries with it the same weight as Bond but a much heavier burden. Where Bond was one, there are thousonds like the petitioner. In 2007 the Supreme Court in Gall v United States, 552 U.S 38(2007) stated" A sentence of imprisonment may work to promote not respect, but derison, of the law if the law is viewed as merely a means to dispense harsh punishment without taking into account the real conduct i and circumstances involved in sentencing". Gall, 552 U.S at 54(quoting with approval the reasoning of the district court);See United States v Deegan, 605 F.3d 625, 655(2010)(Bright,J, . that harsh federal punishment when compared to lenient state sentencing for the same conduct "Promotes disrespect for the law and judicial system".) By forgetting ’, ignoring, mi sunder standing, and relabeling the Trafficking And Victims Act, legislation implementing a treaty, courts using a single dictum in Missouri v Holland which states" If a treaty is valid there can be no dispute about the validity of the statute[ implementing the treaty]... 252 U.S 416, 432(1920) have given many like the petitioner decades in prison, leaving this court no choice but to confront and overturn Missouri v Holland. ,• • ♦ QUESTIONS PRESENTED ARE: 1. Do the constitutional structural limits on federal authority impose constraints on the scope of Congress authority to enact legislation to implement a valid treaty, at least in circumstances where the federal statute, as applied* goes beyond the scope of the treaty, intrudes on the traditional state prerogatives, and is i concededly unnecessary to satify the government's treaty obligations? 2; Can provisions of the Trafficking And Victims Protection Act codified at 18 U.S.C §1591 be interpreted not to reach ordinary domestic, local cases unrelated to transnational crime, where state and local statutes are enough to satisfy the United States treaty obligations, in order to avoid the difficult question on whether to overrule Missouri v Holland? 3. Are the TVPA criminal provisions exempt from the statutory definition of Trafficking in Persons I.E A; transnational Organized Crime? 4. Are government prosecutors bound by specific enhancements put in a plea agreement that linduced the plea?. ii