- Thread starter
- #21
The "treaties" that Obama created were NEVER approved by the Senate so President Trump is more then allowed to get rid of them.Thank you, Picaro, but the Supremacy Clause determines the issue.
"The strongest argument for those asserting that Congress must be involved in terminating treaties is based on the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, Article VI, which states that treaties are "the supreme law of the land." The Constitution is silent on how federal statutes can be terminated, and they too are the law of the land. No one would suggest the President could unilaterally revoke a federal statute. Nor should he be able to unilaterally terminate a treaty -- another part of the law of the land -- without the authority of the Congress.
A more limited, but related argument is that since the President can only make a treaty with the advice and consent of the Senate, he must procure the same advice and consent to end a treaty.
Those claiming that the president has unilateral power to terminate brush aside the Supremacy Clause. They say it is addressed to the courts alone, and that its purpose was to make sure treaties were superior to state laws. And they dismiss treating treaties as the equivalent to federal statutes as little more than sophistry. Treaties are international agreements, not domestic laws, they point out, and few treaties have any domestic implications. Equating the two simply because they are both forms of federal law and thus supreme over state law, they argue, is mere sophistry."
CNN.com - FindLaw Forum: The president, Congress and treaties - September 3, 2001
LEft wingers loved Obama's 'executive agreements' as long as they screwed over the U.S., no 'concerns over breaking treaties' then, of course, such as when the vermin 'agreed' with the UN scum that Christians weren't 'legitimate refugees' in Syria or anywhere else in Islamo-Land, or from Red China, either; the latter made his Wall Street buddies and his beloved Iranian terrorist Mullahs especially happy.. They also love those 'self-executing treaties' for the same reasons.
Opinio Juris » Blog Archive The Modern Doctrine(s) of Non-Self-Executing Treaties - Opinio Juris
Opinio Juris » Blog Archive Medellín, Non-Self-Executing Treaties, and the Supremacy Clause - Opinio Juris
Some of the 'related' links at the bottom of these pages are also worth a read for those with the time.
Last edited: