The details of his case before the CAAF is being fought on the basis of many legal perspectives, any of which, if upheld, would overturn his court martial. However, this thing has to do with something much bigger than just Army Specialist 4^th Class, Michael New. The fundamental principles of U.S. independence are what his case is really all about. It exposes the fact that our country’s involvement in the United Nations is unconstitutional on its face and undermines the Constitutional structures our free republic was founded upon. If that be so, then forcing Americans into service to that foreign power is also unconstitutional. Let me give you a little foundation, Don’t worry, you won’t have to be a "Constitutional Scholar" to figure this one out.

The Constitution’s framers gave all Federal lawmaking power to the Congress, an elected body, which was to be accountable to the people (and the State legislatures before 1913) by consequence of being elected by them. They intentionally prohibited the judiciary, the Executive Branch and all other entities from having any Federal legislative (lawmaking) power, as they were naturally not as accountable to the people. This is clearly stated beyond any shadow of a doubt in Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution:

"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

Article 1, Section 1 – U.S. Constitution

However this legislative power was not unlimited, as the statement "herein granted" indicates. The Constitution specifies what powers the Federal Government has. Other than those powers enumerated in the Constitution, it has no others. In common talk it could be put this way: "If the power to do something is not specifically listed in the Constitution, the Federal Government is not allowed to do it. " The Tenth Amendment left no doubt regarding this reality.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

10th Amendment – U.S. Constitution

The Constitution vests all legislative power in the Congress, and assigns them no power to delegate that legislative authority. Why? The framers wanted those making the laws to not only be accountable to the people, but also bound by the power limits of the Constitution. This simple principle, which is not hard to understand, cuts right to the heart of why our country’s involvement in the United Nation’s is patently unconstitutional and prohibited by it. This is true regardless of the merits or faults of our participation in that global organization.

Neither the United Nations General Assembly nor the United Nations Security Council are elected by, or directly accountable to the people of the United States. Neither are they bound by the Constitution of the United States of America. The United Nations is far more than just a meeting place for diplomats. If that were the case, we would not be still bombing Iraq, there would be no U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, no U.N. sponsored World Court, no United Nations Population Fund working to promote abortion & "family planning" worldwide. The U.N. indeed has all the trapping of a government itself. Our involvement, assigns legislative authority to the United Nations that Constitutionally belongs solely to the Congress, legislative power that is supposedly binding on the United States as we become subject to its resolutions, etc. Delegation of legislative power outside of the Congress of the United States is prohibited by the Constitution and it undermines the very foundations of sovereignty and accountability. It is for this same fundamental reason that United States involvement in the World Trade Organization is unconstitutional and our treaties pertaining to both global organizations should be considered null and void.

The fact that the United Nations’ objective has been global government from the start is an entirely separate matter, however it is just as substantial a reason to mandate the United States’ immediate withdrawal. The U.N. charter, and global government objectives are incompatible with and in direct opposition to the principles our country was founded upon. However, U.S. authorities continue to cooperate in the perpetuation of this monolith to socialism, humanism and globalism with billions of your tax dollars yearly. They also get angry when a little David-like American soldier with a rank the equivalent of Corporal dares to say "No!" to the Goliath of global government.

"How DARE he," they say. "What gives HIM the right?" They don’t like the answer: The Constitution of the United States of America, which is the supreme law of the land, even over the military and the acts of Congress.

Meanwhile, most of our Federal-level elected representatives do nothing but watch, or aid and abet the usurpation of our nation’s independence. I guess "trouble makers" like SPC4 Michael New just stand in the way of "progress."

After all, what’s the big deal with a uniform?

I wonder if that’s what the soldiers in Germany said to themselves, when first ordered to wear the emblem of the swastika?

I thank God there are still some Americans like Michael New, who are willing to say "no."