Can Trump end NAFTA on his own?

[Meathead]

Not us, but Mexico will have to pay a certain percent of their workers more. This will of course raise the price of the cars that we buy.

But it is not enough of a raise that it would make car companies invest billions to move their plants back to the US soil. They will just pass the cost along to us and it will not mean more jobs. This was a minor tweak to a minor part of NAFTA.

Trump though is doing his best to keep Canada from coming to a deal, even leaking his own off the record comments and then talking about them every day since. The last thing Trump cares about are the workers on the US.

A semi-literate gay Marine millionaire?!

Who wouldathunk?

 

[Tom Horn]

Since arguments can be made for both sides on whether Trump has sole power to end NAFTA, I see that as something for the Supreme Court to decide - if and when it comes about. Sure can imagine the many lawsuits with most of our states exporting goods to Canada more than any other country.

The Supremes already decided the President has the authority. The 1974 Trade Act gives the President ultimate authority to declare any treaty that affects our national security (the authority he's using to raise tariffs) null and void after Congress is notified. When Carter unilaterally ended our treaty to protect Taiwan, Barry Goldwater challenged his decision and got an injunction. The USSC threw it out by concluding it was a political treaty and Congress had no jurisdiction over Executive branch decisions. And SURPRISE! Congress never ratified the NAFTA text...see below:

Moreover, termination of NAFTA would not, by itself, change the implementing legislation, H.R. 3450, the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act. NAFTA is an agreement between three sovereign powers, enforceable in international law, but with no effect in US domestic courts. Congress did not ratify the NAFTA text; it ratified H.R. 3450. That’s what matters domestically. If President Trump terminates NAFTA under Article 2205, he would not, by that action, change a word in the implementing legislation. Because invoking Article 2205 would have no effect on H.R. 3450, and because the implementing legislation says nothing about congressional assent, the Supreme Court would very likely reach the same conclusion as in Goldwater v. Carter: It would uphold President Trump’s notice of withdrawal.[2]


Can Trump Terminate NAFTA?

 

[BluesLegend]

Trump could not actually, "end NAFTA" but he could withdraw US participation, which in effect would void any US participation with the agreement.
If the US removes itself from NAFTA the US would have much less access to their biggest export markets. Many within the US business & agriculture communities view the potential for US withdrawal from NAFTA as a net negative.

Don't be such a disingenuous hack. Mexico and Canada would have less access to American markets which form a much larger share of their exports. Businessess in both countries are potentially more butt hurt than you FFS.

It's the consumers that will be hit with higher prices, that's it. What a fucking genius Trump is, right?

Wrong.

They said it on the news last night, Trump's deal with Messiko will force the use of more expensive labor to build cars. You think the car companies are going to gift you that?

LOL leave the big thinking to Conservatives and Trump.

 

[Taz]

Trump could not actually, "end NAFTA" but he could withdraw US participation, which in effect would void any US participation with the agreement.
If the US removes itself from NAFTA the US would have much less access to their biggest export markets. Many within the US business & agriculture communities view the potential for US withdrawal from NAFTA as a net negative.

Don't be such a disingenuous hack. Mexico and Canada would have less access to American markets which form a much larger share of their exports. Businessess in both countries are potentially more butt hurt than you FFS.

It's the consumers that will be hit with higher prices, that's it. What a fucking genius Trump is, right?

Wrong.

They said it on the news last night, Trump's deal with Messiko will force the use of more expensive labor to build cars. You think the car companies are going to gift you that?

LOL leave the big thinking to Conservatives and Trump.

Because you can’t figure out what good that’ll do the US?

 

[Tom Horn]

It's the consumers that will be hit with higher prices, that's it. What a fucking genius Trump is, right?

BOO FUCKING HOO....I'd rather pay $14 for a good American hammer that will last a lifetime and keep fellow Americans employed than pay $10 for an asian piece of shit hammer that cost a fellow American his job.

 

[Taz]

It's the consumers that will be hit with higher prices, that's it. What a fucking genius Trump is, right?

BOO FUCKING HOO....I'd rather pay $14 for a good American hammer that will last a lifetime and keep fellow Americans employed than pay $10 for an asian piece of shit hammer that cost a fellow American his job.

Cars will cost thousands of dollars move, not just a measly $4.

 

[Tom Horn]

Cars will cost thousands of dollars move, not just a measly $4.

No they won't...you're conflating steel prices under current tariffs which will be eliminated with a new NAFTA. We've already more than made up for trans-shipped Chinese steel using domestic makers who will compete with each other same as they did before we got sold out by our globalists.

 

[percysunshine]

NAFTA was negotiated & signed by George HW Bush.

It did not have the votes to be ratified although it was support by more Republicans than Democrats,

So the ideas of NAFTA were written into a bill & passed Congress & was signed into law.

A President can not just change the law unless it states so in that law.

So can Trump end NAFTA without Congressional approval?

Does Trump know this?

Wiki works....

After much consideration and emotional discussion, the US House of Representatives passed the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act on November 17, 1993, 234–200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. The bill passed the Senate on November 20, 1993, 61–38.[21] Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.[22][23]


To answer your question, per the Constitution, the Executive can undo acts of past Executives, and the Legislators can undo acts of past Legislators. But the Executive cannot undo past legislation.

Hope that helps.

 

[Tom Horn]

Wiki works....

After much consideration and emotional discussion, the US House of Representatives passed the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act on November 17, 1993, 234–200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. The bill passed the Senate on November 20, 1993, 61–38.[21] Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.[22][23]


To answer your question, per the Constitution, the Executive can undo acts of past Executives, and the Legislators can undo acts of past Legislators. But the Executive cannot undo past legislation.

Hope that helps.

WRONG...see my post above.

 

[percysunshine]

Wiki works....

After much consideration and emotional discussion, the US House of Representatives passed the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act on November 17, 1993, 234–200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. The bill passed the Senate on November 20, 1993, 61–38.[21] Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.[22][23]


To answer your question, per the Constitution, the Executive can undo acts of past Executives, and the Legislators can undo acts of past Legislators. But the Executive cannot undo past legislation.

Hope that helps.

WRONG...see my post above.

Treaty Clause - Wikipedia

Still in limbo

 

[Taz]

Cars will cost thousands of dollars move, not just a measly $4.

No they won't...you're conflating steel prices under current tariffs which will be eliminated with a new NAFTA. We've already more than made up for trans-shipped Chinese steel using domestic makers who will compete with each other same as they did before we got sold out by our globalists.

Take the 4 bucks you saved and go buy yourself a clue.

 

[Tom Horn]

Take the 4 bucks you saved and go buy yourself a clue.

I'd rather buy a clue than another chinese hammer eh, dickwad?.... next time know what you're talking about.

 

[Tom Horn]

Wiki works....

After much consideration and emotional discussion, the US House of Representatives passed the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act on November 17, 1993, 234–200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. The bill passed the Senate on November 20, 1993, 61–38.[21] Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.[22][23]


To answer your question, per the Constitution, the Executive can undo acts of past Executives, and the Legislators can undo acts of past Legislators. But the Executive cannot undo past legislation.

Hope that helps.

WRONG...see my post above.

Treaty Clause - Wikipedia

Still in limbo

No it isn't....If you come here to learn something once in awhile, why not admit you learned something?

 

[Toro]

Take the 4 bucks you saved and go buy yourself a clue.

I'd rather buy a clue than another chinese hammer eh, dickwad?.... next time know what you're talking about.

No you wouldn't.

 

[Tom Horn]

Take the 4 bucks you saved and go buy yourself a clue.

I'd rather buy a clue than another chinese hammer eh, dickwad?.... next time know what you're talking about.

No you wouldn't.

I've had the same American made framing hammer for over 50 years and half a dozen closed-in carports and patios turned into Arizona rooms....not to mention the dozens of murders I've committed with it in my dreams.

 

[Tehon]

NAFTA was negotiated & signed by George HW Bush.

It did not have the votes to be ratified although it was support by more Republicans than Democrats,

So the ideas of NAFTA were written into a bill & passed Congress & was signed into law.

A President can not just change the law unless it states so in that law.

So can Trump end NAFTA without Congressional approval?

Does Trump know this?

NAFTA was signed by Bill Clinton....dumbass.

NAFTA was signed by George HW Bush in 1992. Clinton signed the implementing legislation.

 

[RealDave]

Of course he can, and he did.

No he didn't. He made anew agreement with Mexico that is not yet finalized that maintains most of NAFTA.

He has never ended NAFTA.

 

[RealDave]

NAFTA was negotiated & signed by George HW Bush.

It did not have the votes to be ratified although it was support by more Republicans than Democrats,

So the ideas of NAFTA were written into a bill & passed Congress & was signed into law.

A President can not just change the law unless it states so in that law.

So can Trump end NAFTA without Congressional approval?

Does Trump know this?

NAFTA was signed by Bill Clinton....dumbass.

NAFTA is the treaty signed by George HW Bush you stupid fuck.

 

[RealDave]

NAFTA was negotiated & signed by George HW Bush

Like I said before...turn off CNN...they are lying to you....

Wow, you are a dumbass & people were actually dumb enough to agree with you.

 

[RealDave]

Since arguments can be made for both sides on whether Trump has sole power to end NAFTA, I see that as something for the Supreme Court to decide - if and when it comes about. Sure can imagine the many lawsuits with most of our states exporting goods to Canada more than any other country.

The Supremes already decided the President has the authority. The 1974 Trade Act gives the President ultimate authority to declare any treaty that affects our national security (the authority he's using to raise tariffs) null and void after Congress is notified. When Carter unilaterally ended our treaty to protect Taiwan, Barry Goldwater challenged his decision and got an injunction. The USSC threw it out by concluding it was a political treaty and Congress had no jurisdiction over Executive branch decisions. And SURPRISE! Congress never ratified the NAFTA text...see below:

Moreover, termination of NAFTA would not, by itself, change the implementing legislation, H.R. 3450, the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act. NAFTA is an agreement between three sovereign powers, enforceable in international law, but with no effect in US domestic courts. Congress did not ratify the NAFTA text; it ratified H.R. 3450. That’s what matters domestically. If President Trump terminates NAFTA under Article 2205, he would not, by that action, change a word in the implementing legislation. Because invoking Article 2205 would have no effect on H.R. 3450, and because the implementing legislation says nothing about congressional assent, the Supreme Court would very likely reach the same conclusion as in Goldwater v. Carter: It would uphold President Trump’s notice of withdrawal.[2]


Can Trump Terminate NAFTA?

It is not a treaty that was ratified. It is an act of Congress.

You don't ratify a Congressional bill, you pass it. Thereby it is law.